Who would have thought that Anton Fryazin, the famous Russian architect, has Italian roots? Although it would be more correct to say this: would Antonio Gilardi, an Italian diplomat and architect, have thought that he would become one of the pillars of Russian architecture, Anton Fryazin?

Anton Fryazin is building the Kremlin

By and large, even schoolchildren know that the Moscow Kremlin was built by Italian masters. Today, by the way, is the anniversary of the foundation stone of the first tower of this fortress - Taynitskaya. This was done by Antonio Gilardi in 1485. What did the Italians forget in such a backwater as Moscow was at that time?

The same tower

It should be noted that from the point of view of the Europeans of the Renaissance, Muscovy was an Asian country, such as Mongolia or China, trade with which promised real super-profits. And the Italians at that time were much more advanced than any other Europeans, actively exporting their technologies (including fortification) in exchange for all kinds of raw materials (furs, spices, precious materials).

One of these Italians turned out to be Antonio Gilardi - Anton Fryazin - Stirlitz of all trades. He was a real career Vatican intelligence officer and diplomat. It was he who established diplomatic relations between the Papal Throne and Muscovy, it was he who married Ivan III - the grandfather of Ivan the Terrible - to Sophia Paleologus, and it was he who began to build the Moscow Kremlin in the form in which we know it today. This is Russian architecture.

By the way, according to one version, the construction of the Kremlin 2.0 was led by Leonardo da Vinci himself.

Today the Moscow Kremlin is the largest surviving castle in Europe. Personally, I saw him for the first time in 1986, when my parents sent me for the summer to wander from Chernobyl to numerous relatives in Russia. The larger-scale resemblance to Milan's Sforza Castle, of course, impressed me.

Find ten differences

Morality. The Muscovites and Italians found common ground quite unexpectedly. And it revolved around the rather cynical methods that were used by politicians. So Machiaveli, Borgia and Sforza fit quite organically into the policies of the later Rurikovichs.

And today we are little surprised when Russian politicians are friends with types like Silvio Berlusconi.

From the 70s of the 15th century until the end of the 30s of the 16th century, Moscow was enriched with works of architecture worthy of the capital of a huge country.

The final unification of the Russian lands under the auspices of the Moscow Grand Dukes is still far away, but there was already the Battle of Kulikovo (1380), which marked the beginning of the liberation of Rus' from the Tatar yoke. Dmitry Donskoy returns to Moscow with victory. At the end of the 14th century, the long struggle with the Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod and Tver princes also ended in favor of Moscow. By the beginning of the 80s of the 14th century, its leading political role had been determined. In the eyes of contemporaries, Moscow was already a city that “surpassed ... all the cities in the Rusti land with much honor.”

After the Battle of the Don, the process of consolidating the forces of Ancient Rus' intensifies. Despite the campaign of Khan Tokhtamysh to Moscow, the entry of the Lithuanian troops of Prince Olgerd into the borders of Rus' and the resistance of individual princes, there is a gradual unification of Russian lands around Moscow.

Ivan III (1440–1505, from 1462 - Grand Duke of Moscow) continues to fight against the feudal fragmentation of the Russian principalities, for their unification into a centralized Russian state. The period of creation of outstanding works of Moscow architecture began during the reign of Ivan III.

Two circumstances influenced the formation of the architectural style of the second half of the 15th and the first three decades of the 16th century and the selection of masters. In 1453, Constantinople fell under the onslaught of the Turks, and the centuries-old connection with Byzantium, from whose hands the Eastern Slavs received Orthodoxy, was interrupted. A new period began in the history of external relations of Muscovite Rus'.

The tragic fall of Constantinople made Moscow, in the eyes of its contemporaries, the only defender of Orthodoxy and continuer of Byzantine traditions. The niece of the last Byzantine emperor Constantine XI, Sophia (Zoe) Paleologus, who was raised in Rome at the court of Pope Sixtus IV, in 1472 became the wife of Grand Duke Ivan III.

An educated person, Princess Sophia was well-versed in the art of her time, and in particular in Italian Quattrocento architecture. And her confessor, Cardinal Vissarion of Nicaea, a major Byzantine politician and scientist, was associated with engineers and architects of Northern Italy. And when the need arose to build structures that would meet the increased strength of the Moscow state, it was natural to turn through Princess Sophia to the Italian masters of architecture [One should not exaggerate, however, the role of Princess Sophia in inviting the Italians to Rus'. Despite the Tatar yoke and isolation for this reason from Western Europe, Russia’s connection with foreign countries was never interrupted. Evidence of this is the many treasures of money discovered on trade routes, objects of material culture and art that existed in Rus', as well as those architectural elements that are present in the buildings of pre-Mongol Rus'. Sofia Paleolog in this case played only the role of an intermediary].

Thus, for the first time in Russia, Italian masters appeared, who achieved high perfection in the construction of castles and fortresses, enriching architecture with new engineering and artistic techniques.

The works of serf architecture they created, the nature of which was largely determined by a purely utilitarian purpose, did not run counter to the Russian artistic traditions that had developed by the 15th century. The situation was different in civil and especially in religious architecture, where visiting architects had to reckon with centuries-old national traditions. This was the difficulty of the position of Italian architects, who gave their talent and knowledge to the Moscow state. The Italians respected what they saw in Rus'. They were struck by the originality of ancient Russian architecture. While preserving its traditions, they enriched it with technical techniques that were progressive for that time and a new idea of ​​architectural proportions.

Based on chronicle Russian sources and Italian chronicles, it is possible to establish with sufficient accuracy which Italian architects worked in Rus' in the last thirty years of the 15th century and in the first decades of the 16th century.

The first, according to chronicles, to appear in Moscow in 1469 was Anton Fryazin, then, in 1475, Aristotle Rudolf Fioravanti. In 1487, Marco Fryazin (Marco Ruffo?) was already working - the exact date of his arrival is unknown. Pietro Antonio Solari arrives in 1490; in 1494 - (?) r. - Peter Francis Fryazin. Around the same time - Alevia the Old, according to Italian sources - Aloisio da Carcano. In 1504, Aleviz the New (Aloisio Lamberti da Montagnana) arrived and Bon Fryazin was already working. In 1517, Ivan Fryazin appears, his full name is John Battista della Volpe, and, finally, in 1522, Petrok the Small.

Thus, over a period of slightly more than half a century, ten Italian architects came to Rus'; they participated to varying degrees in the construction of Moscow. Peter Francis and Ivan Fryazin should be immediately excluded from this list. All that is known about the first of them is that in 1508 he was sent by Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich to Nizhny Novgorod, where he was building a stone fortress after the partial collapse of its walls due to a landslide of a high mountain, under which 150 households were buried in the settlement. The second Fryazin came to Pskov twice - in 1517 and 1538. - to correct the main wall of the Pskov Kremlin. The chronicles do not name the works of these architects in Moscow, although, undoubtedly, they lived for a long time in Moscow, since only from here could they be sent by order of the Grand Duke to other cities. Thus, eight Italian architects who had great knowledge and practice in construction in general and military structures in particular worked in Moscow.

ANTON FRYAZIN

Very little is known about this Italian architect. Some sources call it his birthplace Italian city Bigenza. He arrived in Moscow in 1469 as part of the embassy of the Greek Yuri from Cardinal Vissarion, who then began negotiations on the marriage of Ivan III to Princess Sophia Paleologus.

For sixteen years, the chronicles say nothing about the construction activities of Anton Fryazin and only in 1485 they name his first work - the construction of the Tainitskaya tower (in the terminology of that time - the strelnitsa) of the Moscow Kremlin: “...That same spring, on May 29, the foundation stone was laid on the Moscow the strelnitsa river at the Sheshkov (Chashkov) gate, and under it there was a cache, and it was made by Anton Fryazin.”

Modern historiography has drawn attention to such a gap between the year of arrival and the first mention of the building. This silence of the chronicler can be explained by the fact that in 1471 a diplomat, also Anton Fryazin, came to Moscow as part of the Venetian embassy of Trevisan. The Nikon Chronicle and other sources provide a lot of information about the activities of this Anton Fryazin in the diplomatic field and then, in 1485, they suddenly report the construction of the Tainitskaya Tower. It is unclear how a diplomat, to whom Ivan III gives a number of assignments and who, while carrying them out, travels between Venice and Moscow, turned into an architect. Obviously, the ancient chronicler united two different people in one person. All this does not explain the reasons for the chronicler’s silence on the architect’s activities. It is possible that Anton Fryazin arrived in the year the Taynitskaya Tower was laid, but then this does not coincide with the year of the appearance of Cardinal Vissarion’s embassy in Moscow.

There is only one explanation for this historical inconsistency: significant facts in the history of the construction of Moscow appear on the pages of chronicles; such a fact was the construction of a new Kremlin tower; everything else passes by the chronicler's attention.

The construction of the Tainitskaya Tower - the first work of the first of the Italian architects who came to Moscow - begins the reconstruction in brick of the white stone Moscow Kremlin, which had fallen into disrepair, dating back to the time of Dmitry Donskoy. Three years later, in 1488, Anton Fryazin built the corner Sviblova Tower, which in 1686 was renamed Vodovzvodnaya.

Speaking about the Kremlin towers of the 15th–16th centuries, it should be remembered that they did not have hipped roofs built in the 17th century. Initially, they were massive cylindrical or rectangular volumes, with some exceptions they were raised high above the walls and pushed forward beyond their line, which made it possible to longitudinally fire at the enemy going on the assault.

The Taynitskaya tower, which got its name from a secret passage dug towards the river, is a passageway, rectangular and very massive, with a diversion archer, raised relatively low above the walls. She not only played the role of an archer, but also served as a support for the adjacent wall spindles. In 1772, in connection with the construction of the palace according to the design of V. I. Bazhenov, the tower was demolished and then restored according to the measurement drawings of M. F. Kazakov in the dimensions and architectural details that were given by Anton Fryazin, with the subsequent addition of a hipped top .

During the reconstruction and expansion of the Kremlin embankment in 1953, the outlet archway was demolished, and the Taynitskaya tower acquired its modern appearance.

The Sviblova (Vodovzvodnaya) tower was the second oldest of the three structures erected at the base of the Kremlin triangle facing the Moscow River. In its proportions it is more massive than Beklemishevskaya (Moskvoretskaya) and more decorated. Not high above the white stone plinth are round loopholes for plantar strikes. Up to the middle of the height, the tower is lined with alternating belts of protruding and recessed brickwork, which gives it even greater massiveness. Then there is a narrow strip of white stone on which the arcature belt rests. This motif is not repeated on any of the Kremlin towers. The whole is completed with a magnificent crown of hinged loopholes (maschicules) and dovetail crenellations with firing slots.

The Sviblova Tower was destroyed in 1812 and then restored by the architect O. I. Bove.

And the arcature belt, and the shape of the machicolations, and the “dovetails” are something new that first appears in the ancient Russian architecture of fortifications and to which we can find direct analogues in the architecture of medieval Italy. Let's remember the castle and bridge of the Dukes of Scaligeri in Verona or the Palazzo del Capitano in Orvieto. We will find exactly the same arcature belt as on the Sviblova Tower of the Kremlin as the under-cornice frieze of the Cathedral of San Cirnaco in Ancona and on many other monuments of the proto-Renaissance to the Quattrocento. And the main innovation was that, starting from the second half of the 15th century, Russia began to widely use brick in construction. This was also the merit of Anton Fryazin, who began the reconstruction of the Moscow Kremlin.

ARISTOTLE RUDOLFO FIORAVANTI

Aristotle Fioravanti is one of the largest Italian engineers and architects of the 15th century. Much more is known about his life and work than about his predecessor. He was born in the city of Bologna in 1415, into a family of hereditary architects, whose names have been mentioned in city chronicles since the mid-14th century.

The architect's father was, apparently, an outstanding architect. He is credited with rebuilding the Palazzo Communale (Palace of the Community) from 1425 to 1430 after the fire, as well as fortifying the Aringo tower above the Palazzo del Podesta in Bologna.

In the traditions of Quattrocento people, fascinated by antiquity, it was customary to give newborns the names of ancient heroes and thinkers. And the future engineer and architect was given the name of Aristotle at birth, thereby, as if anticipating the vastness of his knowledge and the courage of his technical thought.

The name of Aristotle Fioravanti was first mentioned in the chronicle of his hometown in 1436. This year, he, together with the foundry maker Gaspar Nadi, casts a bell and raises it to the city tower of Aringo. This bell rang until 1452, then, in 1453, a new, larger one was cast. This bell was raised to the tower using devices invented by Aristotle Fioravanti.

The greatest flowering of the master's building art dates back to the 50s of the 15th century. By this time, he, together with his uncle Bartolomeo Rudolfino Fioravanti, began a number of engineering and construction works.

In a short period of time, from August to December 1455, with extraordinary skill he moved one of the city towers in Bologna from one place to another. In its new location, the tower stood for about four centuries and was only demolished in 1825 due to disrepair. At the same time, he straightened the bell tower in the city of Cento, which also stood until the mid-18th century. The third tower is the campanile at the Church of St. Angela in Venice - after straightening, it stood for only two days and, due to the weakness of the soil, unexpectedly collapsed, crushing several passers-by. This tragic incident forced Fioravanti to leave Venice, where he never returned. Subsequently, Fioravanti agreed to carry out all work of this kind only after a preliminary check of the strength of the soil and the foundation of the structure.

Until 1458, Aristotle worked in his hometown, where he repaired and built part of the city wall and, to strengthen the defense, cleared large spaces in front of the walls of all buildings. In connection with these works, he was brought to court, accused of arbitrariness. In general, when you read Italian chronicles and archival documents, a picture of the difficult life of one of the largest engineers and architects of the second half of the 15th century gradually appears before your eyes. Twice he was accused of making counterfeit coins and faced endless lawsuits; then he was forced to flee Venice, since the Council of the Republic wanted to put him in prison due to the fall of the tower he had straightened. Fioravanti was neither a counterfeiter nor an adventurer. He was a brave and talented civil engineer, and in those buildings that have come down to us, he appears as an architect who perfectly mastered the art of architecture.

The Italian period of Aristotle Fioravanti's work is remarkable mainly for its engineering work. And in this respect, he can be called the predecessor of Leonardo da Vinci. Bold solutions for devices for lifting large weights to great heights, hydraulic structures carried out on the instructions of the Duke of Sforza - the canal in Cremona and the Parma Canal, which a quarter of a century later is continued by the great Vincentian, the strengthening of military castles and especially the movement and straightening of towers in Bologna, Cento and Mantua - all this made a huge impression on his contemporaries. In 1458, Aristotle entered the service of Francesco Sforza and moved with his family to Milan.

This city, as in general northern cities Italy, differed from the southern city-republics. In contrast to commercial and industrial Florence, Milan was an important military and political center. Aristotle Fioravanti, like Leonardo da Vinci later, came to this city primarily as an engineer. He begins his work for the Sforza Dukes by repairing the ancient stone bridge on the Ticino River.

It is known that Aristotle at this time worked with Antonio Averlino, nicknamed Filarete (1400–1469), the creator of the bronze doors of the Cathedral of St. Peter's in Rome, over the construction of the Milan hospital, which has survived to this day. In his treatise on architecture, written in 1464, Filarete speaks highly of Fioravanti several times. Filarete built only the southwestern part of the huge building, until 1465, and it was completed by the architect Guiniforte Solari, the father of Pietro Solari, who later worked in Moscow.

Fioravanti stayed in Milan until the end of 1464 and returned to Bologna with his family. By this time, he had established a lasting reputation as a major engineer. In a letter from the Bolognese authorities, who offered him permanent service in the city, Fioravanti was called “an amazing genius, unparalleled in the whole world.”

Rumor about him has already crossed the borders of Italy. In 1467, Fioravanti was invited by the Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus to build military fortifications in connection with a possible Turkish invasion. With the consent of the Bolognese authorities, who retained his salary, Aristotle left for Hungary (according to some sources, together with Antonio Filarete), where in six months he managed to draw up designs for fortresses and build a bridge across the Danube. King Matt was so pleased with his activities that he allowed him to have his own seal and presented Aristotle with valuable gifts.

Perhaps it was the last eight years of the Italian period of Aristotle’s life that were the most fruitful. This is evidenced by even a simple list of works carried out by Fioravanti at this time: 1466 - correction of the Aringo city tower in Bologna; there is also work to strengthen the city gates; straightening of the Reno River in 1470; Fioravapti builds a water supply system in the city of Chento and at the same time receives an invitation from the College of Cardinals to come to Rome to draw up a project for moving to another place the famous obelrsk, which at that time stood where it was planned to build the Cathedral of St. Petra.

The only architectural work of Fioravanti that has survived in Italy is the building of the Bologna municipality - Palazzo del Podesta. In 1472, after returning from Rome, Aristo-. The tel begins work on the reconstruction of this building.

A model of the building was previously made, which Aristotle completed in 1472, three years before leaving for Russia. The municipality of Bologna could not immediately begin to rebuild the old buildings, and when this opportunity arose, Aristotle was no longer in Italy. The Bolognese people waited patiently for the return of their famous architect. In 1479, “sixteen members of the Government of the city of Bologna wrote to the Grand Duke of All Russia, asking him to allow the architect Aristotle Fioravanti to return to his homeland, which is necessary for his work and whose absence is very difficult and inconvenient for his family.” But Aristotle did not return. In 1489, according to his model, the building of the Palazzo del Podesta in Bologna was completed and in this form has survived to this day.

In June 1474, Ivan III sent his ambassador Semyon Tolbuzin to Italy with a special assignment to find architects and engineers to work in the Moscow state. According to some chronicles, Aristotle Fioravanti met with the Russian ambassador in Venice, according to others - in Rome. Obviously, this meeting nevertheless took place in Rome, where the architect went in 1473 in connection with renewed negotiations on the project for moving the obelisk.

But unexpectedly, Aristotle was imprisoned on charges of selling counterfeit coins. This became known in Bologna. The city archive preserved the decree of the authorities: “June 3rd day 1473. Since it came to light that the master of engineering, Aristotle, was captured in Rome regarding counterfeit coins and, thus, covered himself with shame in the state where he was sent by our Government specifically to serve and carry out the instructions of the Holy Father, then we, with all our white beans (i.e. unanimously - P. 3.) deprived the above-mentioned Master Aristotle of the position and contents that he receives from the Bologna Chamber, and decided that this the deprivation was considered from the day of his conviction forever, provided that the accusation turns out to be true.”

The accusation turned out to be false. In 1474, Fioravanti was already free and met with Semyon Tolbuzin to sign a contract to work in Russia.

The Grand Duke's cautious diplomatic representative made inquiries about Fioravanti. And here, probably, it could not have happened without the recommendation of Cardinal Vissarion, who took part in the fate of Aristotle.

The accusation overflowed Aristotle's patience. The sixty-year-old architect saw the only salvation from persecution and envy in leaving Italy. There is information that at this time the Turkish Sultan invited him to build fortresses. But this would already be betrayal of the homeland and the entire Christian world. And Aristotle Fioravanti chooses Muscovite Rus', about which there were legends in Europe at that time.

His choice was not accidental. Meetings with Vissarion of Nicea and especially his stay in Venice prepared this choice. Fioravanti was in Venice a year or two after the fall of Byzantium. In the city they only talked about the tragic fate of Constantinople. The value of Byzantine art increased enormously. And before Aristotle’s eyes stood the multi-domed Cathedral of Mark, the semicircular completions of the main facade (they resembled the zakomaras of the temples of Ancient Rus'), frescoes and mosaics by Byzantine masters or works inspired by their art by Italian artists. An intelligent and impressionable architect, with an excellent professional memory, preserved all these images. That is why he so quickly penetrated into the very essence of ancient Russian art, rooted in the artistic traditions of Byzantine.

Six months after signing the contract - in January 1475 - Aristotle, together with his son Andrei and servant Petrusha, as part of the embassy of Semyon Tolbuzin, set off on a long journey. At that time, getting to Moscow was not easy. The travelers may have chosen the route that Sophia Paleologus took from Rome to her new home three years earlier: from German city Lübeck, then through the Livonian lands, Novgorod or Pskov to Moscow.

The best time of year to overcome many rivers, streams, swamps and off-road conditions was winter. We traveled throughout January, blizzard February, March. Past rare villages, even rarer cities, past smoking huts and huge, seemingly endless dense forests. And everywhere there is wood: white birches, gloomy spruce, mighty oaks. Walls and towers made of huge log houses and unexpectedly elegant boyar mansions, decorated with various carvings, “siege yards” - fortified estates and rare roadside taverns where horses were changed.

According to the First Sofia Chronicle, “in the summer of 6983 (1475) on the Great Day, the ambassador of the Grand Duke Semyon Tolbuzin came from Rome, and brought with him a master of murol, who builds churches and chambers, named Aristotle.”

"Great Day" - the Easter holiday - in 1475 fell on March 26. Then Aristotle Fioravanti appeared in Moscow. The capital greeted the Italian architect with the crimson ringing of church bells and an amazing appearance, unusual for a European. From the high bank of the Moscow River, Aristotle saw a picturesque cluster of log huts, intricate boyar mansions, outbuildings, and white stone dilapidated fortress walls. The city was adjacent to settlements, villages and fortified monasteries. And on the horizon there was a blue forest, through which winding paths and wide rutted roads went.

In 1367, the Kremlin was first surrounded by a white stone wall. By the time Fioravanti arrived, the Kremlin walls had become dilapidated, smoked from many fires, settled and partially lost their battlements. The fortress that defended the town of Moskov, which had settled on Borovitsky Hill three centuries earlier, had already taken on the shape that, in a slightly expanded form, was forever established in the layout of Moscow. And who knows, maybe it was then, on this spring day, before the architect’s mind’s eye that the grandiose plan of the strongest citadel in Europe arose!

At the court of Ivan III, Aristotle was greeted kindly. Perhaps personally and, undoubtedly, from the words of Cardinal Vissarion, Sofya Fominichna knew Aristotle Fioravanti and had heard a lot about his engineering art. In addition, the reports of Ambassador Semyon Tolbuzin also confirmed the high skill of Fioravanti. The Venetian diplomat Ambrogio Contarini, who visited Moscow in 1476, reports that in this city “various Italian craftsmen worked, among them Master Aristotle from Bologna, an engineer who built a church in the square. I happened to live for some time in his house, which was almost next to the Master’s house,” that is, in the Kremlin, not far from the palace of the Grand Duke. And the first thing that was entrusted to the architect was the construction of the main shrine of Ancient Rus' - the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin.

They tried to solve this problem even before Aristotle. It is known that on the site of the current cathedral there stood a small white stone church, which fell into disrepair by the early 70s of the 15th century. According to the chronicle, the walls threatened to fall and were supported by thick logs, and one of the chapels adjacent to the north-eastern corner of the church collapsed. Three years before the arrival of Aristotle Fioravanti, according to the custom of those times, tenders were scheduled for the construction of a new cathedral. The lowest price was announced by two masters - Ivan Krivtsov and Myshkin. They were entrusted with the construction of the temple. The architects were given certain conditions: it was necessary to build a new cathedral based on the model and likeness of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, but larger in all its parts.

Krivtsov and Myshkin began dismantling the old church, which was three meters smaller than the newly built one and therefore ended up inside. Chronicles report that a temporary wooden church was built there, in which the wedding of Ivan III and Princess Sophia took place.

In 1474, the walls were vaulted, but suddenly in May the northern wall, inside of which there was a staircase to the choir, and part of the western wall collapsed. Everything had to start again. Pskov craftsmen were urgently called for consultations. They praised the “smoothness” of the walls, but stated that the lime used for the construction did not “glue” enough, that is, it did not have the necessary viscosity to fix the stone blocks. They refused to participate in the construction.

Reporting this event, the chronicle names as the cause “earth cracking,” which allegedly occurred in Moscow on a May night, but does not provide any details of this rare phenomenon for Moscow and does not talk about damage to other buildings. Such stinginess of the chronicler raises doubts about the veracity of the story. Perhaps all this was needed in order to somehow justify the failure to build the cathedral church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in the Kremlin.

In fact, everything was explained more simply. Krivtsov and Myshkin, like the Pskov masters, did not build such extensive temples as were to be erected in the Kremlin. The Mongol invasion interrupted the building traditions of the Kyiv and Vladimir-Suzdal lands, which once provided unsurpassed examples of architecture. It was necessary to restore these traditions, but on the basis of modern construction technology. This was the meaning of inviting Italians to Rus'.

The cathedral stood dilapidated for a year. And in 1475, immediately upon arriving in Moscow, Aristotle began construction. According to the chronicles, it is possible to reconstruct the order of work almost year after year. The only thing that causes disagreement among researchers is the timing of Fioravanti’s trip to the cities of North-Eastern Rus' - Vladimir, Novgorod, Pskov, where he went to get acquainted with the monuments of ancient Russian architecture and, above all, with the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir. There is reason to think that he made this journey twice: the first time - to Vladimir, which is relatively close to Moscow, and then, later, to the north.

Fioravanti did not consider it possible to include the surviving parts of the old church in his construction, and work began with the destruction of its remains. This was done in a way that was surprising to Muscovites. The so-called “ram” - a heavy oak log, bound with iron and suspended between three beams connected at the upper ends, swinging back and forth, hit the wall with terrible force and destroyed it. The chronicler wrote about the impression made by this device: “... they made it every three years, and in one week or less they fell apart.”

Before starting to dig the foundation and lay the walls, Fioravanti carefully found out the reasons for the fall of the Assumption Cathedral Church. He confirmed the point of view of the Pskov craftsmen about the unsuitability of lime mortar and showed how to prepare it. As a result, “I ordered the lime to be mixed thickly with hoees, and as soon as it dries out in the morning, I couldn’t break it apart with a knife... like thick dough was dissolved, but smeared with iron spatulas.”

According to the chronicle, the foundation was laid at a depth of over two fathoms, and it was laid not on the ground, but on oak piles driven into the base of the ditch. These were all innovations that surprised Muscovites, but were quickly accepted by them.

Russian builders used brick before Fioravanti’s arrival, but it was of poor quality and was used mainly for backfilling white stone walls. Aristotle built special brick factories behind the Andronikov Monastery in Kalitnikov, on the banks of the Moscow River. Compared to the old Russian brick, the new one was more oblong in shape and immeasurably harder.

Having completed the preparatory work (destroying the old church, digging ditches for the foundation and preparing bricks), Fioravanti began laying the walls in the same 1475. Previously, he went to the ancient mining of white stone in Myachkovo near Moscow, tested the stone and arranged for its delivery to the construction site.

The chronicle reports that in the same year the walls came out of the ground, but they were laid differently. Instead of broken bricks and small stones, which were used for backfilling, now bricks were placed between the outer and inner white stone walls, prepared according to the size and recipe of Fioravanti. It was simpler, faster, and most importantly, the load fell not on the cladding, but on the brickwork, which, in fact, was the wall. Then they began to install internal pillars. There are six of them in total: four are round, two are square, hidden by the altar barrier. Twelve cross vaults rest on them. This, too, was news, for the ancient shape of the pillar was square, with four corners cut out, forming an equilateral cross in plan.

In 1476, Aristotle raised the walls to the height of the arcature-columnar belt. For strength, he uses metal ties instead of traditional oak ties, securing them with anchors on the outer walls. Lifts were used to supply bricks and lime. The chronicle dwells in detail on these innovations.

In 1477 the cathedral was roughly completed. It took another two years for the interior decoration, and on August 15 (26), 1479, the Assumption Cathedral was solemnly consecrated.

Already contemporaries were able to appreciate the beauty of the new cathedral. The author of the Resurrection Chronicle wrote: “That church was wonderful in majesty and height and lightness and sonority and space; such a church had never happened before in Rus', except for the Vladimir church; and the master was Aristotle.”

Fioravanti had to take into account in his work local traditions, which were developed over centuries by ancient Russian masters, and adapt his understanding of architectural forms to them. Five-domed roof, roof-to-wall covering, division of walls with pilasters, arcature-columnar belt, perspective portal - architectural and structural elements that determine the composition of the building. The Italian architect, brought up on the art of the Renaissance, introduces order into this construction, strict subordination of parts, precise drawing of details and carefully found proportions - the ratio between the height and width of each of the facade links - and this gives the entire structure an impressive, strict and monumental appearance.

Taking the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral as a basis, Fioravanti creates a work that is different from its prototype, with architectural and artistic features unique to it. They consist not only in a different proportionality of all elements, but also in the strict symmetry of their arrangement. The eastern facade, sandwiched by two powerful buttresses, is divided into five apses - two on each side of the central, main apse. It is completed with three arcs of zakomaras, forming a free space filled with paintings above the hemispheres of the apses. This technique distinguishes Fioravanti’s work from the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, where the apses almost reach the height of the roof covering.

The southern and northern facades each have four equal sections of walls, the western - three. In the middle part of this facade, along the axis of the central apse, there is a porch, decoratively processed with a double arch with a hanging weight in the middle. This technique subsequently became very widespread in Russian architecture. The side perspective portals are shifted to the third section and form the transverse axis of the building. Each upper window is cut along the axis of the semicircle of the zakomara, and the middle window is cut along the axis of the arcature-columnar belt. All individual elements of the building and its proportions form a single harmonious whole.

The chronicler found a penetrating definition of the feeling that arises when entering the cathedral: majesty, lightness and elation, which he called “sonority.” For the first time in the history of Russian architecture, the interior of the temple appeared in the form of a huge and undivided, freely visible and high hall. And inside the cathedral, as well as in the facades, Fioravanti preserves the rhythm and interconnection of equal-sized elements, in their totality organizing the space. These elements were twelve equal compartments between the pillars, covered with cross vaults. The architect abandoned the choirs - an indispensable accessory of grand-ducal cathedrals - and the under-dome space, equal to the diameter of the large middle dome. But the need to adhere to the church canon, which required that the central dome be larger than the four side ones, forced Fioravanti to lay out his drum on a wall located at a distance from the inner ring, which is why a hollow annular chamber was formed at the base of the drum. With this constructive technique, the architect reconciled the new solution with the traditions of ancient Russian temple construction.

While Fioravanti was still alive, in 1481, the main cycles of fresco painting were completed, and by 1515 all the walls, columns and pillars were completely covered with painting. It was preserved until the middle of the 17th century, when, having become very dilapidated, it was restored according to specially removed copybooks. Then, over the centuries, they were repeatedly updated. And only in 1914 their scientific restoration began. In the 1920s, authentic wall paintings from the 15th - early 16th centuries, which were considered lost, were discovered in the northeastern apse and in the altar barrier. These priceless fragments in their stylistic character go back to the frescoes of the Ferapontov Monastery, executed in 1500–1502. Dionysius and his team of artists.

Let's try to imagine what the cathedral looked like in the year of its completion. In place of the blank wall of the iconostasis, built only in the 17th century, there was a low altar barrier that opened up a view of the central apse and side chapels. Four columns - tall and thin - did not clutter the interior. They were decorated with Roman-Byzantine capitals, which may have been inspired by the capitals of St. Stamp in Venice.

The Assumption Cathedral, which turned five hundred years old in 1979, has undergone relatively few changes. And subsequent restorations, especially at the beginning of the century and in the 70s, almost completely restored its original appearance. It is unknown for what reasons the sculptural capitals of the columns carved from white stone were knocked down in the 17th century. But their Romanesque form has been preserved, perfectly coordinated with the supporting arches of the vaults.

In the 19th century, the white stone slabs of the original floor were replaced by cast iron ones with relief ornaments, and therefore the floor level rose slightly. The north-eastern aisle was rebuilt, above which a sacristy was built.

There are good reasons to believe that Aristotle Fioravanti thought out the general arrangement of the walls and towers of the Kremlin. In the interval between 1475 and 1485, when work began on replacing the dilapidated white stone walls and towers with new brick ones, Fioravanti in Moscow, in fact, had no competitors. The only Italian architect Anton Fryazin, who, as already mentioned, in 1485 and 1488. erects two towers and a wall between them on the river side of the Kremlin, could not begin this work without having a general plan of the entire fortress. Such a plan could only be given by Aristotle Fioravanti, the famous fortifier who built in his homeland the Castello Sforchesco and fortified castles for the Duke of Milan, the towers and walls of Bologna, and defensive lines in Hungary.

Even now, despite the addition of various hipped roofs to the towers in the 17th century, the architectural and spatial composition of the Kremlin amazes with the integrity and thoughtfulness of the solution. And at the end of the 15th century, when the Kremlin appeared before the amazed contemporaries with all the might of its walls and towers, this integrity, which is easy to imagine, was even more amazing. Such completeness of architecture could only arise through the will of one genius, who outlined the general plan of the structure, determined its individual parts, their sizes and shapes.

The rationalism of Quattrocento architecture was reflected here in the straightening of the north-eastern wall and the construction of round towers at the base and top of the Kremlin triangle, which created a balanced spatial composition of the entire citadel. Thus, both in the Assumption Cathedral and in the huge ensemble of fortress walls and towers of the Kremlin, one can trace this attraction to geometricism - from the point of view of the Italian architect of the 15th century, the only way to establish the ideas of humanism and order in architecture, as opposed to the chaos of the Middle Ages.

There is another, albeit indirect, evidence that the creator of the Kremlin master plan was Aristotle Fioravanti. In the manuscript department of the library of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Leningrad there is a 15th-century manuscript - “Treatise on Architecture” by Antonio Averlino Filarete, with whom, as mentioned above, Fioravanti built a hospital building in Milan, and according to some information, traveled with him to Hungary at the invitation of King Matt Corvinus. Filarete's treatise became a reference book for architects of the 15th century and was distributed in many copies in Italy. It is natural to assume that Filarete’s friend and comrade-in-arms, Aristotle Fioravanti, had a copy of this book and that he brought it to Moscow. In the treatise, its author speaks highly of Aristotle several times.

If you go into a detailed study of the grandiose monument of architecture and engineering art that is the Kremlin, then you can trace the stylistic features of Northern Italian fortress architecture and see the recommendations set out in the treatise implemented.

In 1478, a year before the end of the Assumption Cathedral, Aristotle Fioravanti, at the insistence of Ivan III, went on a campaign against Novgorod as chief of artillery. This field was fully affected by the diversity of Aristotle’s knowledge and experience. When the army of Ivan III approached the Novgorod fortress, the need arose to build a bridge across the Volkhov. Fioravanti built a temporary pontoon bridge of extraordinary strength. The chronicler talks about this engineering structure as follows: “On December 6, the prince ordered the great bridge to be repaired (i.e., built) on the Volkhov River to his master Aristotle Fryazin, near Gorodishche; and that master built such a bridge under Gorodishche on ships on that river, and even more The Grand Duke, having overcome, returned to Moscow, but the bridge still stands."

Biographers of Aristotle Fioravanti associate the construction of the Cannon Yard in Moscow with his name. It was located on the site of Pushechnaya Street, parallel to the Kuznetsky Bridge, where forges were located along the Neglinnaya River that then flowed. Apparently this was the case. Foundry, which Fioravanti was engaged in in his youth, coinage and artillery are the subject of his research in connection with the construction of fortified castles. All this allowed him to take up the organization of the Cannon Yard in Moscow. Foundry in Ancient Rus' has been developed since time immemorial. But there were not enough of their own craftsmen, especially in the 15th century, when the tasks of unifying Rus' and getting rid of the Tatar yoke required extensive military operations. Therefore, the Italian architect and engineer, in terms of the versatility of his knowledge - a typical representative of the Renaissance, became an essential specialist in Moscow.

In 1482, Aristotle Fioravanti, in anticipation of a campaign against Kazan, was sent forward with an artillery convoy and reached Nizhny Novgorod to the banks of the Volga.

A letter from Fioravanti, dated February 22, 1476, to the Milanese Duke Galeazzo Maria II of the Sforza dynasty, who ascended the throne in 1466, was discovered in the Milan archives. The quarrelsome and cruel duke devoted most of his time to hunting. Apparently Fioravanti, while working in Milan, met with him. Finding himself in Russia and remembering Galeazzo’s passion, Fioravanti went in search of gyrfalcons and, judging by the letter, reached the White Sea and visited the Solovetsky Islands. Fioravanti sent the captured white gyrfalcons with his son Andrei to Milan. By the way, this letter is one of the earliest testimonies of a foreigner about Moscow, which Fioravanti calls “the most glorious, richest and commercial city.”

Fioravanti made his last journey through Ancient Rus' in 1485. But before that, an event occurred that was also the last test in the difficult life of the great architect.

Among the foreigners living in Moscow at that time was the Italian doctor Antonio. He undertook to treat the sick Tatar prince Karakucha, but he died. And then the Italian doctor was accused of poisoning the prince. After severe torture, by order of Ivan III, Antonio was executed. This made a terrible impression on Aristotle, and he decided to secretly escape. The attempt turned out to be a disaster. The Sofia Chronicle reports that Aristotle “was afraid of the same thing, and began to ask the Grand Duke for his land; the Great Prince captured him and, having robbed him, planted him in the Ontonian courtyard behind the Holy Lazor.” Obviously, then Fioravanti’s drawings, his letters, diaries and travel notes were lost.

Aristotle was imprisoned, and perhaps this would have been the end of his life. But it was necessary. And in 1485, the chronicle mentions the name of Fioravanti for the last time as the chief of artillery in the campaign of Ivan III to conquer the Tver principality. Obviously, the seventy-year-old engineer and architect just this year [Professor P. Cazzola in his work “Masters of Mud in Moscow at the end of the 15th century (From Russian chronicles and documents of Italian archives)” believes that Aristotle Fioravanti died in 1486. ​​This is his assumption based on a notarial deed dated August 24, 1487, found in the State Archive of Bologna, where the children of the architect from his first and second marriage sought to divide the property of their father, the “magnificent horseman” (an honorary title given by the government of Bologna to eminent citizens), who died some time ago ] found peace in the land to which he gave his best work.

Aristotle Fioravanti can be counted among the rare masters who entered the history of world culture with only one work.

The Assumption Cathedral opened a new page in the history of ancient Russian architecture. The influence of its forms can be traced in many works - from the cathedral Novodevichy Convent in Moscow and to distant Vologda - and in the time periods from the 15th to the end of the 17th century and even in the 19th century. The use of large-sized bricks, laying out walls in a bandage, erecting domes in one brick, using iron ties and anchors instead of oak logs, progressive organization of construction work, and most importantly, understanding a work of architecture as a harmonious combination of all its elements - this is what the Italian master brings to the table. into ancient Russian construction practice.

Fioravanti was a contemporary of the largest and early theoreticians of the Italian Renaissance - Antonio Filarete, Leon Battista Alberti (1414–1472). They developed ideas of proportionality in nature and in man, embedded in the philosophical concepts of ancient architects. This understanding of harmony, built on numerical relations of proportionality, formed the basis of the composition of the Assumption Cathedral. Without using details from the architectural arsenal of the Renaissance, as other Italian architects did, Aristotle creates a work imbued with the spirit of the Renaissance and at the same time deeply national.

MARCO FRYAZIN AND PIETRO ANTONIO SOLARI

In Moscow they appeared in different time: Marco Fryazin [Historian N.M. Karamzin, without good reason, gives Marco the surname Ruffo, which was picked up by subsequent Russian historiography. The Italian scholar Merzario classifies him among the descendants of Marco dei Frisoni or da Coropa. In our essay we have preserved the surname under which he was known in Russian chronicles. - Marco Fryazin] was already working in 1484, while Pietro Antonio Solarn only arrived in 1490. They were united by joint work on the construction of the Great Golden Chamber, which is known to us as the Faceted Chamber.

Italian sources do not mention Marco Fryazin, and one can only learn about his work in Moscow from Russian chronicles. Antonio Solari pays a lot of attention to both sources.

The first news of Marco Fryazin in Moscow dates back to the beginning of work to replace the old wooden palace buildings with stone ones. This was part of Ivan III’s extensive plan for the reconstruction of the old white stone Kremlin. In 1484, Marco Fryazin built a brick chamber to store the grand ducal treasury. The site for construction was chosen between the Annunciation and Archangel Cathedrals. Before the construction of the Treasury Court (as the chronicles call this building), the personal treasury of the Grand Duke was kept in two places - under the Church of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary and under the Annunciation Cathedral, and the treasury of the Grand Duchess was kept in the Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist.

Marco’s first building has not survived, but it can be described from the images that have come down to us, in particular from the drawing from the book “Election to the Kingdom.” The state courtyard was a relatively small brick building, consisting of two parts: one of them, closely adjacent to the apse of the Annunciation Cathedral, was relatively low and covered with a gable plank roof; the other, which seemed quite impressive in comparison with the first tower, ended with a high tent. Completely smooth, without any architectural decoration, the walls of this building ended in its tower-shaped part with a wide cornice. The state courtyard was connected by passages with the rest of the Terem Palace.

In 1487, Marco Fryazin built the Small Embankment Chamber to the west of the Annunciation Cathedral, which also did not survive, but was carefully recorded in the measurement drawing of D. Ukhtomsky before its reconstruction in 1751. It was a two-story brick building covered with vaults. A basement rose above the basement floor, and on the second floor there were two chambers - the Dining Room and the Reception Room, each with its own exit.

The façade of the Embankment Chamber, judging by Ukhtomsky’s drawing, is interesting in that it is decorated with details first used in Russian architecture: these are triangular sandstones above the windows of the first floor, arches on the second floor and a wide, full-profile cornice crowning the entire building. Horizontal rods separate floor from floor, the proportions of windows and their placement leave large free planes of the walls. All this together creates a new image of a public building, in which “Italianisms” sound stronger than in other civil buildings of the Kremlin. With this building, which existed until the mid-18th century, Marco Fryazin seemed to anticipate the character of the architecture of the Arsenal in the Kremlin, and perhaps influenced it.

Simultaneously with the Small Embankment Chamber, in 1487, “Marco Fryazin made a strelnitsa, on the corner down Moscow Beklemishevskaya.” He placed it on the site of the corner tower of the white-stone fortress built in 1367 and thereby completed the construction of the brick walls on the southern side of the Kremlin. Inside the tower, Marco Fryazin built a secret well.

The Moskvoretskaya Tower, as the chronicle otherwise calls it, has survived to this day. In 1680, the tower was built with a multi-faceted tent, and in 1707, at its foot, in anticipation of a possible attack by the Swedes, earthen ramparts were poured and loopholes were slightly cleared to install more powerful guns (during the restoration of 1948, the loopholes were given their original sizes and shapes ).

It has already been said above that the Kremlin towers of the 15th–16th centuries should be imagined without the hipped tops, built almost two hundred years later. In Beklemishevskaya Strelnitsa it is especially easy to draw a boundary between its old and new parts. Following the machicles, which project beyond the entire volume, the overhanging upper part once bore serrations in the form of swallowtails. Then they were replaced with a brick parapet with flies, typical for all Kremlin towers. Compared to the Vodovzvodnaya Tower, Beklemishevskaya is extremely laconic. Her tall and slender cylinder is placed on a beveled white stone plinth and separated from it by a semicircular roller. And no more decor, nothing that could disturb the image of a combat rifleman. The tower is good not only in itself, but also because it enriches the silhouette of this part of the city. The walls of the Kremlin diverge from it at an angle and the river carries its quiet waters close by. It is visible from Zamoskvorechye, from Red Square and the adjacent streets of Kitai-Gorod.

In addition to Beklemishevskaya, Marco Fryazin, according to the chronicle, “laid two archers in Moscow - Nikolskaya and Frolovskaya.” But obviously, he was only laying the foundations, since the chronicle later attributes the construction of these and other towers to Pietro Solari.

The last time the chronicle (Nikonovskaya) mentions the name of Marco Fryazin was in 1491. Whether he left for his homeland or ended his days in Rus' is unknown. His creative destiny was not easy. With the exception of the Beklemishevskaya Tower, all the buildings he began after 1487, including the Chamber of Facets, were completed by other masters. But in the Moskvoretsk Strelnitsa, Marco Fryazin showed himself to be a mature architect with an excellent sense of proportions and a progressive fortification engineer who used the most advanced techniques for that time.

Sources date the beginning of the construction of the Faceted Chamber to the same 1487. The end date is 1491. Solari arrived in Moscow in 1490. This means that Marco Fryazin worked without him for three years. Thus, the entire architectural and spatial design of the Chamber of Facets and its implementation belong to Marco, and the architectural decoration of the facades and interiors is apparently the work of Solari. But in order to establish this, it is necessary to briefly describe the creative path of the famous architect and sculptor in his homeland. He belonged to a family of famous Milanese sculptors and architects. The son and student of Guiniforte Solari (1429–1481), Pietro Antonio (about 1450–1493) took part in the construction of the cathedral in Milan, the Ospedale Maggiore - and the famous Certosa monastery in Pavia. In addition, he worked as a sculptor. Two of his works survive in Italy, dating from 1484 and 1485: the tomb of de Capitani in Alexandria and the sculpture of the Madonna in the Sforzesco Castle Museum in Milan. Both of them characterize Solari as a somewhat archaic master, keen on the ornamental development of sculptural images. This is especially noticeable on the facade of the Cathedral of Pavia Certosa (1453–1475), completely covered with lace ornaments, which is very significant for confirming our assumptions about the attitude of Pietro Solari to the decorative decoration of the Chamber of Facets. Here the master had every opportunity to satisfy his love for decorative filling of the plane also because Orthodoxy prohibited the use of round thematic sculpture in church and secular life.

The Faceted Chamber was part of a large palace complex, facing its façade onto the Kremlin's Cathedral Square. At the time described, this unusually picturesque ensemble was still far from complete. Only a year after the completion of the Palace of Facets, in 1492, Ivan III ordered the dismantling of the wooden palace to begin and the construction of a stone one. And for the temporary grand ducal residence, wooden mansions were cut down. But the foundation of the new stone palace took place only seven years later - due to a fire that destroyed all the wooden structures of the Kremlin. And the Faceted Chamber stood for some years on Cathedral Square next to the Assumption Cathedral.

The building of the Chamber of Facets, with a clear silhouette of a simple rectangular volume, stood out among other, later buildings due to the unusual decoration of the main (eastern) facade. It is lined with white limestone stones, cut into four sides and forming a pyramid. The rows of cut stones (they gave the name to the chamber) start from the height of the basement floor and end below the cornice, leaving a free strip of smooth white stone. The corners of the façade are covered with thin twisted columns, the capitals of which rise above the top row of rustications and rest on cubic stones. The cornice hangs somewhat over the wall and visually seems to support the high hipped steep gilded roof.

The windows were smaller than they are now. Two semicircular arches resting on an impost were inscribed into the rectangular platband. These are typically Italian windows; rarely placed on the facades, they left a large free space on the wall, giving the building even greater monumentality.

In 1682, the windows of the Faceted Chamber were hewn out, the semi-circular endings disappeared, and the architect Osip Startsev gave the frame a new look - in the form of a straight sandstone, resting on free-standing columns on brackets. Everything is covered with the richest carvings: the columns of the columns, panels under the windows with images of lions holding cartouches with crowns, capitals and brackets.

The windows from the 17th century have survived to this day and blend perfectly with the old facades of the 15th century.

On the left side facade there was an external open white stone staircase - the magnificent Red Porch. Its straight march of thirty-two steps, fenced with carved stone railings, was interrupted by two platforms - lockers, in ancient Russian terminology. The lockers were decorated with gilded figures of heraldic lions, and the steps were covered with iron plates.

The red porch, intended for the Tsar's ceremonial exits and the reception of foreign ambassadors, led to the second floor into the ceremonial chambers of the Faceted Chamber - the Holy Entrance Hall and the Great Golden Chamber.

The Holy Entrance Hall is an oblong, low room under arches with four deep formworks. Above the vaults there was a mezzanine - a hiding place, from where, through the window, the female half of the grand ducal family could observe the ceremony of receiving ambassadors and other events of court life, to which, according to the customs of those times, women were not allowed.

The interiors of the Chamber of Facets are given exceptional luxury by the richest carvings, gilding and wall paintings. Pietro Litoppo Solari concentrated gilded stone “lace” on the portals of the door and window openings of the Holy Vestibule and the Great Golden Chamber. The huge door portal presents a very complex composition. The immediate frame of the doorway consists of two blades covered by an entablature, followed by two projecting pilasters with elaborate bases and rich capitals. The pilasters, in turn, carry a strongly loosened entablature, on which a keel-shaped pediment rests, with the lower ends of its frame bent outward in the form of volutes. The tympanum of the pediment contains a sculptural relief of a double-headed eagle - one of the early images of the coat of arms of Ancient Rus', inherited by the Grand Duke from Byzantium along with the Monomakh cap. Above the eagle is a lion mask, and on the sides are heraldic griffins. All other parts of the portal are covered with small, superbly composed and skillfully executed ornaments, into which typical Russian double-headed eagles are woven. All the portals of the Chamber of Facets are made in the same character and differ only in details.

The walls of the Holy Entrance and the Great Golden Chamber are covered with paintings made by Russian masters, and together with the golden ornament of the portals they form the main decorative decoration of the interiors.

From the Holy Vestibule the visitor enters a huge space

Great Golden Chamber. It is practically a square room with sides measuring 22.1 X 22.4 m. In the center there is a massive pillar on which the heels of four cross vaults rest, forming a surprisingly bold, light covering reaching a height of nine meters. The chamber is illuminated through two rows of windows, with twelve windows in the bottom row on its three sides, and only four in the top row.

The faceted chamber, begun by Marco Fryazin and completed by Pietro Antonio Solari, had both ancestors and descendants in its general architectural composition in Ancient Rus'. The ancestor of the Moscow Faceted Chamber was the Novgorod one, mentioned back in 1169. This chamber, which has survived to this day, is the result of a restructuring in 1433. It is a vast square room, in the center of which there is a massive pillar bearing the heels of four cross vaults. The formwork of the vaults rests on a star-shaped system of ribs. Despite the stylistic features (in this case, ribs are a typical sign of Gothic, explained by the fact that Russian and German masters worked together), the ancient single-pillar design is characteristic here. An example, closer both in time and place, is the refectory of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, built by the architect Vasily Dmitrievich Ermolin in 1469.

There are many descendants of the Faceted Chamber. Moreover, it should be noted that the rib vaults never took root. Everything that was built after it was only its modification, more or less successful. An example is the White and Red Chambers of the Patriarchal Court of Rostov the Great.

Thus, the architects of the Great Golden Chamber did not introduce any fundamentally new features into its composition, but only brought the traditional ancient form to perfection.

The Faceted Chamber occupies the same place in the history of ancient Russian civil architecture as the Assumption Cathedral in the architecture of religious buildings. Both here and here we see a strong commitment to the national tradition, which even the art of the Italian Renaissance did not overcome. Italian masters were only able to modernize the ancient original architecture, but not change it. Marco Fryazin and Pietro Antonio Solari, with the construction of the Chamber of Facets, introduced the image of a city house into Russian use for the first time. This is not an estate fenced off from the street, but a house where you can enter directly from the street or square. The main facade, as if transferred to Moscow from the northern Italian cities of Ferrara or Bologna, ends with a hipped steep roof, typical of Russian wooden mansions. We see the same combination of Italian and Russian traditions in the interior: the richness of Italian ornament combined with the keeled pediment of the portals, the richest ancient Russian painting on the walls and the architecture of the single-pillar chamber. These features of the interpenetration of Italian and Russian artistic cultures are especially noticeable in this palace building - the only well-preserved monument of the 15th century. With the exception of the windows altered in the 17th century, the disappeared Red Porch and hipped roof, as well as the walls painted in the 19th century, everything else has survived to this day.

Perhaps, of all the foreign architects who worked in the Kremlin, Pietro Antonio Solari made the greatest contribution. In 1490–1493 he built Borovitskaya, Konstantino-Eleninskaya, Frolovskaya (Spasskaya) and Nikolskaya road towers, a strelnitsa with a cache above Neglinnaya and part of the walls. To this list, based on chronicle data, one can also add the Corner Arsenal (Sobakina) multifaceted tower and the rectangular Senate tower. However, it should be remembered that two towers - Nikolskaya and Frolovskaya - were founded by Marco Fryazin. We do not know what should be understood by the laconic chronicle term “lay”: did Marco really limit himself only to laying the foundations of the towers or began to build walls as well? In any case, he facilitated the work of Solari, who built the main facade of the Kremlin fortress, overlooking Red Square. The Kremlin walls here are closed on the south-eastern side by the Frolovskaya passage tower, renamed Spasskaya in 1678, and on the north-east by the faceted Corner Arsenal (Sobakina) tower. The entire lengthy front of the wall is rhythmically divided into equal sections with the help of the Senate (blind) and Nikolskaya (passage) towers.

The Red Square side of the Kremlin was most heavily fortified. Before the construction of the Kitai-Gorod wall, the square was a free space where the enemy could not hide.

After the death of Pietro Antonio Solari, the eastern side of the Kremlin was additionally fortified with a second wall - it was lower and adjacent to a moat filled with water.

Of the Kremlin towers built by Solari, we will focus on two - Arsenalnaya and Frolovskaya: on the first - due to its architectural merits, on the second - because it became the main entrance to the Kremlin and, with its silhouette and architectural decoration, so organically entered into the appearance of the city that became his symbol.

The Arsenal Tower, the most powerful of all the Kremlin towers, was built in 1492. Its task was to defend the crossing across Neglinnaya to the trading center located on Red Square. On the deep foundation, in which a spring-well was hidden in case of a siege, a sixteen-sided tower rises. The powerful volume and spare, clear lines of the silhouette make it a work of great monumental art. Before the addition of the tent in the 17th century, the tower above the machicolae was topped with dovetail battlements, replaced by a standard brick parapet with flies. The Arsenal Tower, like Beklemishevskaya, is not difficult to imagine in its original form, raised high above the corner of the converging Kremlin walls. The Arsenal building did not yet exist at the time of Solari, and the tower dominated the area and, like Beklemishevskaya on the opposite corner, played a significant urban planning role.

The most integral - in the sense of the fusion of two different stages of construction - is Frolovskaya, later renamed Spasskaya. By tradition and due to its topographical location, the Spasskaya Tower has always been the Main Gate of the Kremlin. It was built on the site of the Frolovskaya strelnitsa of the white-stone fortress built in 1367. During its next renovation, the architect and sculptor V.D. Ermolin placed on it two white-stone reliefs with images of the patrons of the Moscow princes - Saints George and Dmitry of Thessalonica. Later they decorated the tower built by Solari in 1491. And one of them - the spearman George - became the coat of arms of the city of Moscow.

Pietro Antonio Solari, when erecting the towers of the main entrance to the Kremlin, gave them the stern appearance of a fortress. He attached a diversion arch to the Spasskaya Tower. There is no combat platform in Pei, and the combat move takes place along a rectangle of walls at the level of the merlons. A drawbridge was thrown across the moat towards Red Square, tightly covering the gate arch in the event of a siege or assault. On the facade you can see the holes where the chains were passed to lower and raise the bridge, and in the passage of the gate you can still see the grooves along which the metal grate - gers - rose and fell.

The outlet arch has preserved the architectural forms of the 15th century, extremely laconic. The rectangle of its walls is fixed at the corners with strongly protruding blades and ends with a wavy line of “swallow tails”, somewhat enlivening the stern appearance of the tower.

The newly built Spasskaya Tower differed from the Strelnitsa in height and internal structure. It is divided into floors and has a combat platform for upper combat. Obviously, immediately after construction was completed, the battle area was covered with a wooden tent, on top of which was mounted a copper image of an eagle - the coat of arms of the Moscow state. On one side of the wooden quadrangle the dial of the clock mechanism located inside was placed. The tent often burned, and therefore the Spasskaya Tower was the first to receive the magnificent stone hipped roof that still exists today.

We cannot advise the reader to imagine the Spasskaya Tower as it was in the 15th century. In the 17th century, when other towers were being built on, a new tent was placed on the upper platform and only instead of battlements a parapet with flies was laid out; everything else remained the same. The entire top of the Spasskaya Tower was redone.

In 1625, the construction of the city clock on the main tower of the Kremlin was entrusted to the mechanic Christopher Galovey, who was discharged from England, and the architecture of the tent belongs to the talented Russian architect Bazhen Ogurtsov.

To achieve unity in the composition of the ancient and new parts of the Spasskaya Tower, Vazhen Ogurtsov took a slightly different path than other architects. He retains the merlons of the battle platform, but uses them as a base for the superstructure; To do this, he completes them with a straight cornice, and on it he places circular arches. The angular blades are completed with spiers reminiscent of Gothic phials. All this - arches, spiers, and sculptures of lions - is made of white stone and forms a magnificent stone “lace” against the background of red brick walls. The next tier grows out of it - a quadrangle, on which the dials of the Kremlin clocks are installed. It continues the high-rise composition of octagons with circular “ringing” arches, where the bells are located. The tower is topped with a high steep tent. The unity of the composition of this Kremlin tower is achieved by the fact that the architect does not simply build on, but introduces a single decorative motif for all tiers, giving integrity to the entire structure; The proportions found by the architect emphasize the lightness of the tower and its upward direction.

The historian of Russian architecture, Professor M.V. Krasovsky writes that the Kremlin “at this time became like a warrior who, having repelled enemies forever from the borders of his homeland, returned home and calmly replaced a heavy steel helmet with a light hat, richly decorated with semi-precious stones.”

Solari completed the Frolovsky (Spassky) Gate in 1493, as stated in the text of the stone memorial plaque, then embedded in the wall: “In the summer of July 6999 (1493), by the grace of God, this archer was made by order of John Vasilyevich, sovereign and autocrat of all Rus' and the Grand Duke of Volodymyr and Moscow and Novgorod and Pskov and Tver and Ugra and Vyatka and Perm and Bulgaria and others, in the 30th year of his state, were made by Peter Antony Solario from the city of Mediolan" (Milan. - P. 3.).

We have no information about what reasons forced Pietro Antonio Solari to leave his homeland for Muscovy, unknown to him. It is possible that he was prompted to this by Sophia's elder brother Paleologus, Andrei, a political adventurer who came to Russia twice in order to sell his right to the Byzantine throne at a reasonable price. The last time he came here was in 1490 (according to other sources - in 1489) together with the Russian embassy. This embassy was very crowded, because it brought with it various masters, including the architect Pietro Antonio Solari. In Moscow he was surrounded with honor. Unlike other foreigners, the chronicle calls him not “murol”, not “master of ward affairs”, but “architect”. In one of his letters to his homeland, preserved in the Vatican archives, Solari calls himself “the chief architect of the city.”

On November 22, 1493, before reaching the age of 50, Pietro Antonio Solari died. It is possible that before his death it was he who named those architects who were then invited to Moscow - Aloisio da Carcano and Aloisio Lamberti da Montagnana.

ALEVIZ OLD

With the death of Pietro Antonio Solari, the unfinished construction of the Kremlin found itself without an experienced leader. Ivan III in the same 1493 sent ambassadors Manuel Angelov and Daniil Mamyrov to Venice and Milan for “wall and chamber craftsmen.” In 1494, judging by Italian sources, they brought three craftsmen from Milan: Aloisio da Carcano, a wall master and engineer, Mikhail Parpalone, a blacksmith, and Bernardin from Borgamanero, a stonemason. Good news came from them to their homeland. Aloisio da Carcano was favored by Ivan III, who gave him eight of his own clothes and a fair amount of money, expressing the wish that he build him a castle like the one in Milan. The letter from which we gleaned these details is dated November 19, 1496, and is preserved in the Milan City Archives.

Nothing is known about the fate of the other two masters mentioned in Italian sources. But Aloisio da Carcano, known in Russian chronicles as Aleviz the Old, confused Kremlin historians for a long time. A whole series of structures were attributed to him, which could not have belonged to him either in time or in architectural form. This continued until the 20s of our century, when the Soviet scientist N.A. Ernst, in his book “Bakhchisarai Khan's Palace and the Architect of Grand Duke Ivan III Fryazin Aleviz Novy,” published in Simferopol in 1928, put everything in its place. It turns out that two Aleviz worked in Moscow: the already mentioned Aleviz the Old and Aleviz the New, who appeared in Moscow ten years later, in 1505.

We know nothing about the first Aleviz. But judging by the part of the Kremlin wall (northwestern) that Aleviz the Old erected, he was an excellent, brave engineer.

After the death of Pietro Antonio Solari, the northwestern side of the Kremlin walls, along the bed of the Neglinnaya River, remained unfinished. In the first half of the 19th century, Neglinnaya was enclosed in a pipe and the Alexander Garden was laid out on this site. At the end of the 15th century, it was a river with a bed that often changed due to storm waters and a swampy floodplain, approaching close to the steep slopes of Borovitsky Hill. Before starting to build the walls, it was necessary to strengthen the creeping soil and lay a solid foundation that could withstand the weight of the walls and massive towers. This was entrusted to Aleviz the Old. However, due to the devastating fire of 1493, work could only begin in the spring of 1495. The chronicle reports under this year that Ivan III “laid a hail wall... near Neglina, not along the old one, the city has increased.”

During excavations in 1965, the bases of the walls were exposed here, and it turned out that Aleviz the Old threw arched lintels along the steep bank of Neglinnaya, which leveled out the uneven soil, and only then began to build walls. Aleviz the Old straightens the wall of the western facade of the fortress and brings it to the same height, and rests the long spindles on rectangular towers. Moreover, in the center of this facade, a whole complex of fortifications is created - the Trinity carriageway tower, a diversion archer, a stone bridge on nine arches across Neglinnaya and another tower - a barbican, protecting the bridge and called Kutafya.

If you draw a line on the Kremlin plan from the Spasskaya Tower to the Trinity Tower, it turns out that they stand opposite each other on the same straight line, forming one of the sides of an equilateral triangle. The same rationalism of Quattrocento architecture, which is also embedded in the general composition of the Kremlin citadel, was reflected here. The significance of the Trinity Tower for the western facade of the Kremlin is the same as the Spasskaya Tower for the eastern. That is why the architect, who built both towers in the 17th century, gave their hipped tops almost identical decorative decoration.

The chronicle also attributes to Aleviz the Old the construction in 1499 of a palace for Grand Duke Ivan III next to the Annunciation Church and an internal stone wall from the palace to the Borovitsky Gate. It is possible that he also carried out a number of engineering works to strengthen the Kremlin’s defensive power from Red Square. But here confusion begins in the sources, and it is not entirely clear to which of the Aleviz these works should be attributed. None of the creations of Aleviz the Old's engineering mastery, with the exception of the northwestern wall of the Kremlin, has survived to this day.

ALEVIZ NEW

In the ancient Russian diplomatic practice of the last quarter of the 15th century, a tradition was established: for whatever purpose ambassadors were sent to Western countries, they were charged with the duty of looking for masters of various specialties to work in Moscow. In November

1499 Ambassadors of Ivan III Dmitry Ralev and Mitrofan Karacharov crossed the border of the Venetian Republic. According to Italian sources, their route can be traced: on November 18 they stopped in Bassano and at the end of the month, on the road to Padua, they arrived in Venice, where they stayed until the end of February. Having profitably sold a shipment of leather, they left for Rome. On April 12, the ambassadors returned to Venice and in May

1500 went to their homeland. On this way they passed the cities of Ferrara, Brendole, Longino, where at that time the architect and sculptor Aloisio (in Russian transcription - Aleviz) Lamberti da Montagnana worked. Ralev and Karacharov, wanting to fulfill the mission entrusted to them, could meet with Aloysio and invite him to work in Moscow. On this basis, and also by comparing the work signed by the master - the sculptural tombstone of Thomasina Graumonte in the Church of St. Andrei in Ferrara - with what Aleviz later did in Moscow, Italian scientists identify Aleviz the New with Aloisio Lamberti da Montagnana. This, in fact, is the little that can be reported as an assumption about the work of Aleviz the New in the Italian period of his life. In any case, in 1500 he joined the Russian embassy and went to Moscow.

For three years, written sources have been silent about the fate of Aleviz the New and his companions. And suddenly, in June 1503, the Crimean Khan Mengli-Girey, in a letter to Ivan III, reports: “Nonecha, thank God, you took Dmitry Larev and Mitrofap Fedorov Karacharov into your own hands; and your masters came to us in the month of June and struck us with their foreheads. and they came to us with their wives and children and girls." Ambassador Zabolotsky at the Khan's court clarifies the date of arrival of the Russians and Italians: “two weeks before Petrov Zagovenya,” i.e. no later than the first days of June. The embassy stayed in Bakhchisarai until September 1504. There were no particular reasons for such a long stay at the khan’s residence. It’s just that Mengli-Girey wanted to take advantage of the Italian architect’s stay with him to build his own palace in Bakhchisarai, which later became famous. Aleviz the New built it in fifteen months. But time has not been kind to the palace. Only its portal has survived to this day, from which we can judge the wealth and splendor of the entire structure.

Finally, after insistent demands from Ivan III, Mengli-Girey releases Aleviz Novy and his companions to Moscow. Moreover, in the accompanying letter he gives an enthusiastic review of the Italian’s art: “Aleviz is a great master, not like other masters, a very great master.”

On November 23, 1504, as chronicles report, four years after leaving Italy, Aleviz the New arrived in Moscow.

The activities of Aleviz Novy in Moscow are very diverse. All the architects who worked before him concentrated their efforts mainly in the Kremlin. Aleviz Novy builds not only there, but also in the suburbs, in different places of the expanded and economically strengthened city.

Obviously, Aleviz Novy had great organizational skills. In a short time he built a huge palace in Bakhchisarai; he needed only four construction seasons - from 1505 to 1508 - to build the second largest cathedral in Moscow. In 1508, he built ponds and lined a ditch 34 meters wide and 10 meters deep with white stone. This ditch, erroneously attributed to Aleviz the Old, ran along Red Square and closed a water ring around the Kremlin citadel, which became even more impregnable. From 1514 to 1519 he built eleven churches in different parts of the city. Aleviz Novy becomes the chief architect of Moscow. The churches he built contributed to the formation of the city's silhouette and its architectural and spatial composition. On a steep hill at the end of Ivanovsky Lane stands the Church of Vladimir “in the Old Gardens” - one of eleven built by Aleviz. This area was built up in the 16th century, and this church rose above the low wooden houses.

The 15th and 16th centuries did not yet know the three-part axial compositions typical of later times - the bell tower, the refectory and the church itself. During the time of Aleviz, stone churches were built in one rectangular volume with a portal on the western and apses on the eastern facades. Instead of a bell tower, there was a belfry: either directly integrated into the volume, as in the Church of Tryphon in Naprudny, or a separate device for hanging bells. The laconism of the silhouette, white stone or red brick, which after Fioravanti firmly entered into the practice of Russian builders, a very precisely found place in the space of the city - all this made the churches inseparable from the picturesque landscape of Moscow at the beginning of the 16th century.

And yet, the most significant work of Aleviz Novy remains the Archangel Cathedral in the Kremlin.

Three cathedrals on Kremlin Square shared responsibilities among themselves in the court religious life of the Russian tsars: Annunciation, once connected by a covered passage with the Terem Palace, served as a house church; Assumption - the main shrine of the Moekovsky state, where Russian tsars were crowned kings and patriarchs were buried; Arkhangelsk served as a royal tomb until the end of the 17th century. Thus, the Assumption Cathedral represented spiritual power, while the Arkhangelsk Cathedral represented secular power. This influenced its architecture to some extent.

A year after his appearance in Moscow, Aleviz the New begins the construction of the Archangel Cathedral on the site where the small white stone church of the Archangel Michael, built under Ivan Kalita, stood. By the beginning of the 16th century it had fallen into disrepair, and in 1505 it was demolished.

We will not describe in detail the Archangel Cathedral, which has come down to us with great losses and alterations. Let us try only in general terms to restore its composition, conceived by Aleviz Novy, and pay attention to the features that distinguish this cathedral from the Assumption Cathedral.

The Archangel Cathedral is smaller in size and more archaic in its interior design. Instead of round pillars (as in the Assumption Cathedral), which do not clutter up the internal space, Aleviz uses square massive pillars, moreover, raised on high pedestals and supporting flat cylindrical vaults. Six pillars divide the interior into three naves of unequal width, and they are spaced at unequal distances from each other. In addition, the architect needed to allocate a special place for the female half of the grand ducal family so that they could watch the church service without mixing with the crowd. To do this, Aleviz added a narrow room to the main volume of the cathedral, open to the hall with a large arch-window. As a result, the northern and southern (longitudinal) facades are divided into five unequal parts according to the internal division of the interior.

Thus, in the composition of the facades and general masses, the Archangel Cathedral turned out to be closer to its original sources - the Vladimir-Suzdal churches - than the Cathedral of Aristotle Fioravanti. Obviously, Aleviz the New visited Vladimir and carefully studied the Assumption Cathedral, otherwise it is difficult to explain such a consistent appeal to its scheme.

Aleviz the New found the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral after its construction in 1185–1189. a gallery that brought its plan closer to a square (without altar apses). Aleviz also builds the main core of the six-pillar temple with a gallery, but gives it a completely different character.

The Archangel Cathedral was covered with a roof right along the vaults, and the domes, due to unequal divisions of the interior, turned out to be unequal in diameter. True, this is hardly noticeable to the eye, but still violated the harmony of the whole. The extension to the western facade moved all the domes even more to the east and thereby emphasized the asymmetrical design of the temple.

From the very beginning, the Archangel Cathedral was conceived as a tomb for the great princes and kings of “all Rus',” which required pomp and solemn representation. The Spartan severity and monumentality of the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin did not correspond to this content. Aleviz dresses the three-dimensional composition of the 12th century cathedral in Vladimir in decorative clothing of the Italian Renaissance of the 16th century. And he dresses very generously. There is a whole range of architectural details present here. The loose cornice rests on strongly projecting pilasters with capitals of the Corinthian order. Repeated twice, the cornice seems to divide the building into two floors, while this is not the case in the interior: the interior space of the cathedral from the floor to the vaults is single and not divided.

Zakomar Aleviz fills the tympanums with shells skillfully made of white stone. In design they are close to the already mentioned marble shells of the tomb of Graumonte in Ferrara. The walls between the pilasters up to the middle cornice are decorated with archivolts of blind arches, and at the top of the arc of each zakomara there was a carved pyramid. And all this is made of white stone against a red brick wall.

But the main thing that distinguished the Archangel Cathedral from other church buildings in the Kremlin was the external open gallery adjacent to all the walls, with the exception of the eastern one. The galleries of the Archangel Cathedral have reached us only in the measurement drawings of 1750, executed by the architect D.V. Ukhtomsky, apparently at the same time when he measured the Embankment Chamber of Marco Fryazin. These drawings, discovered by Soviet researchers A.V. Vorobyov and V.A. Smyslov, help us imagine the original appearance of the Archangel Cathedral - without powerful buttresses and even later extensions to the eastern facade. The rhythm of the open arches of the gallery is subordinated to the divisions of the facades themselves, so wide arches are adjacent to narrow ones. But the whole character of the arcade (half-columns of the Tuscan order), the very idea of ​​​​surrounding the cathedral with an open gallery was inspired by Italy, the courtyards of its palazzos. The architect found that measure of pictorial decorativeness that seems to be facing the surrounding space of Cathedral Square, and is not confined to the boundaries of a strict volume.

The Archangel Cathedral has experienced a lot during its existence. It was necessary to strengthen the walls with buttresses, destroy the galleries, change the shape of the middle dome, which was once the same as the side ones, add aisles, renew the painting in the interior, plaster the outer walls, which is why the temple lost one of its best decorative qualities - the polychrome of the facades. And yet, when you stand in front of the building of the Archangel Cathedral, it seems that it has always been like this - white, elegant from the play of light and shadow on the many details that create its plasticity.

By its nature, the Archangel Cathedral is eclectic: its appearance combines ancient Vladimir-Suzdal traditions and elements of Italian architecture of the late Quattrocento era, contemporary to Aleviz Novy. And when subsequently, in the second half of the 16th and especially in the 17th century, Russian masters turned to the heritage left by the Italians, they selected exactly what best suited their national traditions. For example, we did not adopt pillars placed on pedestals or the conventional division of a wall into two floors, but we adopted the polychromy of facades, which received further development in the works of Russian masters of the 17th century. The order in the work of Aleviz Novy retains the appearance of constructive justification (a cornice resting on pilasters), and in the architecture of the 17th century it receives a purely decorative purpose - it is used to decorate window openings (for example, Osip Startsev did this in the facade of the Faceted Chamber) or to secure the corners of a building a bunch of speakers.

Thus, the Archangel Cathedral entered the history of the development of Russian architecture not with a new, progressive understanding of the very essence of the art of architecture, as is inherent in the genius of Aristotle Fioravanti, but with a decorative side that suggested new motives for the traditional commitment to pattern and color inherent in ancient Russian architecture. Italian architectural and decorative motifs, reworked in their own way, acquired a new meaning and enriched Russian art.

The development of decorative forms in the work of Aleviz Novy can be traced, in particular, on the magnificent portals in the Bakhchisaray Palace, in the Archangel and Annunciation Cathedrals of the Kremlin. Let's focus on the last two.

The four portals of the Archangel Cathedral date back closer to 1508, when construction of the building was completed. On the western facade there are three of them - corresponding to the division of the interior into three naves, on the northern facade - one (obviously, the same portal was on the opposite side, but disappeared during the next addition of the aisles and buttress). The main entrance to the cathedral is the middle portal of the western facade. It is placed in a deep loggia, which, together with the steps, forms the temple porch. The two side portals frame the entrance in the form of an arch, supported by two pilasters with Corinthian capitals and ornaments.

The main portal of the Archangel Cathedral is the next stage in the decorative work of Aleviz the New, after the portal of the Bakhchisarai Palace. It belongs to the so-called promising portals. This form takes place in the Assumption and Dmitrov Cathedrals in Vladimir and was transferred by Aristotle Fioravanti to the façade of the Kremlin temple. Aleviz the New had to reconcile this traditional ancient form with his understanding of Quattrocento architecture. He emerged from this difficult situation with honor. Actually, the principle of the overall composition remains the same: the wide and high external outline gradually decreases in depth. The archivolt of the front arch rests on pilasters, then a strand of leaves, intertwined with ribbons and forming a second arch, also rests on columns, and then beveled walls and the same vault lead directly to the entrance. Thus, Aleviz Novy replaced many of the arches and semi-columns forming a perspective portal with two walls slanted inward, richly decorating them with ornaments, the design of which was determined during the work on the entrance to the Bakhchisarai Palace.

The portal of the northern façade differs from the western one only in its slightly smaller size.

It is important to keep in mind that from the planar ornamental composition of the Crimean portal the architect moves on to volumetric-spatial solutions suggested by ancient Russian architecture and which were further developed in the decoration of the northern portal of the Annunciation Cathedral. Its exact dating has not yet been clarified, at least after 1508; there is no doubt that stylistically it belongs to the work of Aleviz Novy.

The portal of the Annunciation Cathedral differs from its predecessors in its even greater splendor of decorative decoration and complexity of the architectural composition. For example, the wide archivolt of the front arch rests on a heavily braced entablature, which is supported by free-standing paired columns. Then everything was done according to the scheme of the portals of the Archangel Cathedral, but with even more ornamentation. In general, it should be noted that after the stone patterning of the Vladimir-Suzdal churches, only Pietro Antonio Solari in the Faceted Chamber and Aleviz.

New in the Kremlin cathedrals were able to bring out the remarkable qualities of soft limestone in fine ornamental carvings.

And yet, with all the splendor and artistic merits of the Aleviz portals, they did not find a response in the subsequent work of Russian masters. The Romanesque perspective portal, combined with a purely Russian invention - the keeled arch - was closer to the feeling of the tectonics of the wall, its massiveness and reliability, than the portals of Italian architects, replete with decorative conventions. But the ornament as such was adopted by Russian carvers and, having been modified in accordance with their tastes, richly decorated the iconostasis of churches, the walls of towers and architectural details.

The Archangel Cathedral - the main work of Aloviz Novy - did not open a new page in the history of Russian architecture, but entered it only through the high art of architectural and ornamental decoration.

Aleviz Novy worked in Russia for a long time. He also built churches in the Kremlin: St. Lazarus - by 1514, John Climacus - in 1518 (this church was then included in the lower tier of the Ivanovo Bell Tower), the Church of the Annunciation - in 1519, possibly the lower floors of the Terem Palace, etc.

In 1531, the chronicle reports that during an explosion at the gunpowder factory, “Alevizov Dvor” was blown up into the air. This is the last mention of the name Aleviz the New in Russian chronicles. Apparently he died in this disaster.

THE LAST FRYAZINS - BON FRYAZIN AND PETROK MALIY

From 1505 to 1508, the Ivanovo Bell Tower was built in the Kremlin. It is being built on the site of an old church in the name of John Climacus, “like the bells,” and in the year of its completion the chronicle reports the name of the builder - the Italian architect Bon Fryazin, the most mysterious person of all the “Fryazins” who worked in Moscow in the 15th and 16th centuries. None of the sources known to us say anything about the origin of the architect, about his work before coming to Russia and the time when he appeared in Moscow.

By the beginning of the 16th century, the Kremlin was already built up with cathedrals, churches, and monasteries. Perhaps each of them had its own belfries, but the sound of their bells did not spread throughout the entire territory of the Kremlin. In addition, the idea of ​​reuniting Rus' into a single centralized state required some kind of architectural dominant that would dominate all Kremlin buildings.

“Ivan the Great” received its familiar appearance only 75 years after its foundation, in 1600. The bell tower was built in two stages, and Bon Fryazin was responsible for the construction of the first two octagons. Each of the tiers has an open arcade "for ringing". Even then, “Ivan the Great” reached a height of 60 meters and was clearly visible from the distant approaches to the city.

The architecture of the bell tower is very simple. Each face of the octagon is emphasized by a blade, and the lower tier was completed with a sub-cornice arcature and a cornice on crackers. The second tier is smaller in volume, seems very elongated and also has open arches for bells. The walls are sparsely cut with slit-like windows, which emphasize their massiveness (the thickness of the walls of the first tier reaches 5 m, the second - 2.5 m).

The second stage of the construction of the bell tower dates back to the beginning of the 17th century, when the bell tower received the completion known to us and reached 81 m in height.

"Ivan the Great" is an amazing building. It would seem that construction in two stages, a large height with a relatively small volume should have made it difficult to find proportionality, but the harmony is not broken: a gradual decrease in tiers, a magnificent transition from an octagon to a round drum through two rows of keel-shaped kokoshniks and, as the completion of this vertical composition, golden belts inscriptions and golden dome.

Recent studies of "Ivan the Great", carried out in the 70s of the 20th century, say that the builders, in search of the ratio of parts, adhered to the golden ratio, which is how they achieved this impression of lightness.

But “Ivan the Great” surprises not only with its architectural merits, but also with its construction technique. The first tiers of the bell tower contain metal beams that hold the walls together. Thanks to this, when adding to the bell tower in the 17th century, there was no need for additional structures. And obviously, this is why the French failed to blow up the bell tower in 1812: the explosion caused a crack to appear in the dome drum, but the bell tower stood.

We do not know other buildings of Bona Fryazin in Moscow. With the construction of the bell tower in the Kremlin, he continued the ancient tradition of pillar-shaped churches, which was further developed in the 30s of the 16th century.

When Petrok the Small appeared in Moscow in 1522, he called himself the architect of the Pope. He agreed to work with the Grand Duke for a period of three to four years, but settled for a long time, converted to Orthodoxy and got married. Italian sources say nothing about his work before his arrival in Russia, and Russian chronicles and acts do not give any information about his work in Moscow in the first decade of his life in this city. And only in 1532 it is reported that under his leadership, a four-tier belfry began to be built on the northern side of Ivan the Great to hang new bells, including the thousand-pound Blagovest bell. The Church of John of Gostun, built by Aleviz the New in 1516, but then dismantled, was moved to the third tier of the belfry. The belfry was completed in 1543 by Russian craftsmen, after the departure of Petrok the Small. In 1552, an external staircase was added to the third tier of the belfry, and it itself was completed with a massive drum and dome. And finally, in 1624, the masonry apprentice Vazhen Ogurtsov, on the instructions of Patriarch Filaret, added a new bell tower with a hipped top to the belfry, known as Filaret’s extension. This is how this complex three-part complex was created, consisting of the bell tower of Ivan the Great, the belfry of 1532–1543. and Filaret's extension in 1624. In 1812, the belfry and extension were destroyed by an explosion and then restored by the architect I. Gilardi according to the design of I. V. Egotov and L. Ruska. Therefore, it is very difficult to judge the true architecture of the belfry facades. It can be assumed that Petrok Maly, as a contemporary of Aleviz Novy and a participant in the work in the Kremlin, introduced decorative elements of the neighboring Archangel Cathedral into the facades of his building (shells in the arches of window frames, division of wall planes with pilasters). We do not know the measurement drawings of the belfry before its destruction, so it is impossible to say how accurately the architects of the early 19th century restored the architectural forms of the 16th century.

The different periods of construction of the belfry of Petrok Maly and its subsequent reconstructions affected the integrity of its architectural composition. It can be assumed that the original four-tiered volume was restored as closely as possible to its original and has a completed Renaissance-Classical façade scheme. This façade can stand on its own as a finished building of good proportions with beautifully drawn details. The arched superstructure “for ringing”, by its nature and divisions, is not connected with the facade of Petrok Maly. Flat, with gaps in the through arches, the superstructure is disproportionately large and cannot serve as an attic, such as was used in Renaissance architecture. And finally, everything is completed by a round massive high cylinder, decorated in the lower tiers with complex plastic decorative columns. The cylinder bears a helmet-shaped golden head with a cross.

In this complex complex, only “Ivan the Great” amazes with its purity of lines, proportionality, and laconic silhouette. But in the Kremlin ensemble, both the belfry and the Filaret extension play a significant architectural and spatial role, complementing the multi-domed cathedrals and the picturesqueness of the entire ensemble.

The most significant work of Petrok Maly was the construction of the fortress walls and towers of Kitay-Gorod, the Great Posad, which by the 30s of the 16th century had grown so large that its population could no longer hide behind the walls of the Kremlin in the event of an enemy attack.

The settlement spread to the east and reached what is now Kitaisky Proezd. Back in 1394, for protection, a ditch was dug along the route of modern Bolshoi Cherkassky Lane and Vladimirov Passage, and they dug “between the courtyards,” therefore, the courtyards stood east of the ditch. Perhaps it was at this time that the name Kitay-Gorod appeared from the Old Russian word “kita”, which apparently means an earthen fortification using wattle fence.

The construction of the Kitai-Gorod wall began in 1534 - during the regency of the mother of the young Tsar Ivan IV - Elena Glinskaya and a year later after the construction of a new earthen rampart and ditch.

May 16 (27), 1535 "Daniel Metropolitan walked with a cross near the ditch and sang a prayer service and consecrated the place and after the prayer service Petrok Maly, the newly baptized Fryazin archer, laid the Sretensky Gate on Nikolskaya Street, and another archer, the Trinity Gate, from the same street to The Cannon Yard, and the third Vsesvyadsky Gate on Varvarskaya Street, and the fourth Kozma Domiansky Gate on Velikaya Street,” reported the Piskarevsky Chronicler.

The wall, 2567 m long and up to 6 m thick, with 14 towers, including 5 roadways, was completed in 1538. It took only four years to build the grandiose fortifications of the second belt of Moscow. The almost regular rectangle of the wall rested at its ends on the Beklemishevskaya tower from the side of the Moscow River and the Sobakin (Arsenal) tower from the Neglinnaya side and formed a single whole with the Kremlin.

Kitay-Gorod occupied an area of ​​58 hectares and was a very strong fortress, built according to the latest fortification technology of that time. The Kitai-Gorod wall was lower than the Kremlin wall, but the width of its upper battle platform - 6 meters - provided greater freedom to the defenders and made it possible to have greater firepower. The wall merlons were straight, and each had three side slits: a large middle one and two side ones for arquebuses. The gaps between the teeth also served for shooting. In addition, in the wall itself and in the towers extended beyond the wall, loopholes were built for the middle and lower battles and machicolations for mounted battles.

The wall is made of large bricks with many different marks, which indicates the increased production of brick, which became the main building material in the 16th and subsequent centuries. The remains of the Kitai-Gorod wall on Sverdlov Square with the corner round tower behind the Metropol Hotel, the long stretch along Kitaisky Proezd, despite the growing cultural layer, give the impression of power and inaccessibility. The beveled plinth is separated from the wall by a white stone ridge. The same roller separates the loopholes of the mounted battlement and the base of the teeth. The general character of the heavy volumes of rectangular and round towers, the sharply defined straight line of battlements, the shape of the loopholes - all these elements are more reminiscent of Genoese fortresses than the Lombard castles of Petroc the Less's predecessors.

In 1539, Petrok Maly was sent to the city of Sebezh, to the local governor. He was accompanied by translator Grigory Mistrabonov. Petrok the Small stayed in this city for three weeks and during this time he founded a fortress. Then he went to Pskov-Pechersky Monastery, from where he was supposed to go to Pskov, then to Moscow. But instead, Petrok Maly with his companions, among whom were the boyar children Andrei Laptev and Vasily Zemets, ended up abroad - in the Livonian Novogrudok (Neuhausen). Here Petrok Maly declared that he did not intend to return to Russia and tried to escape. The fugitive was caught and sent to Yuryev (Derit) for trial by the bishop, who insisted on his extradition to the Grand Duke of Moscow. It is unknown how this matter ended. However, in Russian sources Petrok Maly is no longer mentioned after 1539.

Petrok Maly was the last Italian architect in Rus' in the first half of the 16th century. “Fryazins,” as the Russian people called them, in contrast to the “Germans” - all other foreigners, did their job. New times have come. Simultaneously with the unification of Rus' around Moscow, liberation from the Tatar yoke and the creation of a centralized strong state, the national self-awareness of the Russian people is growing. From their midst come such luminaries of Russian architecture as Fyodor Savelyevich Kon, who decorated “Ivan the Great” with a golden dome, built the White City in Moscow and the Smolensk Fortress; Barma and Postnik, who created a masterpiece of world architecture - St. Basil's Cathedral near the Kremlin walls, and many others. They completed the formation of the center of Moscow, which we never cease to admire.

532 years ago, Italian architect Anton Fryazin laid the foundation for one of the Kremlin towers

Taynitskaya Tower
Ludvig14/Wikimedia Commons

Why Ivan III imprisoned the Italian ambassador in Kolomna, how rain saved the Kremlin towers from an explosion and why the NKVD did not allow scientists into the ancient Russian hiding place, the “History of Science” section tells.

According to an ancient manuscript, on July 19, 1485, Venetian architect Anton Fryazin laid the foundation for the first of twenty towers of the renewed Moscow Kremlin, Tainitskaya, on the Moscow River. This tower not only became the first in the Kremlin under reconstruction, but also, thanks to its creator, made a true revolution in serf construction: Fryazin decided to use bricks for the first time. Following his example, all the Kremlin towers were made of bricks, and subsequently all structures of this type were built in Rus' according to the Fryazino recipe.

There is little information about the master himself. It is known that his real name is Antonio Gilardi, and the word Fryazin, which became his Russian surname, is nothing more than a distorted word “franc”, which in old Rus' was used to call people from Southern Europe, and mainly not the French, but the Italians.

It is also known that Fryazin was originally from the city of Vicenza, which was then part of the Venetian Republic. Being not only an architect, but also a diplomat, he first arrived in Moscow in 1469 as part of the retinue of Ambassador Cardinal Vissarion. The ambassador came to propose to Ivan III a marriage with the exiled princess Sophia Paleologus. Then he returned home with his retinue, but in 1471 he came from the Vatican again and for the first time established diplomatic relations between the two states.

“Ambassador Ivan Fryazin presents Ivan III with a portrait of his bride Sophia Paleolog”
Victor Muzheil/Wikimedia Commons

In the same year, Fryazin was convicted of helping his uncle Ivan Fryazin (Giovan Battista della Volpe) transport the Venetian ambassador Giovanni Battista Trevisan through Moscow to the Golden Horde. And although the embassy to the Tatars had nothing to do with the security of the Russian state, Ivan Fryazin hid the true reason for his mission from the tsar. When everything was revealed, Ivan III was angry (less than ten years remained before the Standing on the Ugra River, so relations with the Horde in Rus' were tense), and the ambassador was briefly imprisoned in Kolomna until everything was clarified. Anton Fryazin was sent to Venice to seek an official apology from her to Russia.

This is where Anton Fryazin’s diplomatic saga ends, and years later, when Ivan III decided to rebuild the Kremlin and for this purpose called upon him a whole galaxy of European masters, his much more brilliant career as a Kremlin architect began. Under his leadership, not only the Taynitskaya Tower was built, but then the Water Intake Tower, no less important in its purpose and more majestic in architecture. True, a number of historians express suspicion that in fact there were two different Anton Fryazins in this whole story: a diplomat and an architect.

Vodovzvodnaya tower of the Moscow Kremlin, view from the Bolshoy Kamenny Bridge
Yulia Mineeva/Wikimedia Commons

The Tainitskaya Tower was erected on the site of the so-called Cheshkov Gate (in the 15th century, not far from there stood the courtyard of a certain Cheshka), but these gates were famous for the fact that in ancient times there was an ancient well-cache here. Either in memory of this well, or for fortification reasons, under the Tainitskaya Tower, located on the southern side of the Kremlin walls, which is the most important for the defense of the city, a secret well was built with access to the river, from which it received its name. According to some sources, water could be supplied to the Kremlin through it in the event of a siege; according to others, from the Tainitskaya Tower there was a secret underground passage under the river, intended for sudden attacks.

Then the tower had a completely different look. It had a strelnitsa (a wooden tower without a tent) connected to the tower by a stone bridge, an access gate with a drawbridge, and even a massive striking clock. The watchmaker lived right there, having built himself two hewn huts above the tower, which quickly became dilapidated over time and were soon demolished. The clock stood until 1674.

Continuation of the material

The Moscow Kremlin is the center of Russia and the citadel of power. For more than 5 centuries, these walls have reliably hidden state secrets and protected their main bearers. The Kremlin is shown on Russian and world channels several times a day. This medieval fortress, unlike anything else, has long become a symbol of Russia.

Only the footage we are provided with is basically the same. The Kremlin is the strictly guarded active residence of the president of our country. There are no trifles in security, which is why all Kremlin filming is so strictly regulated. By the way, don't forget to visit excursion to the Kremlin.

To see a different Kremlin, try to imagine its towers without tents, limit the height to only the wide, non-tapering part and you will immediately see a completely different Moscow Kremlin - a powerful, squat, medieval, European fortress.

This is how it was built at the end of the 15th century on the site of the old white-stone Kremlin by the Italians Pietro Fryazin, Anton Fryazin and Alois Fryazin. They all received the same surname, although they were not relatives. “Fryazin” means foreigner in Old Church Slavonic.

They built the fortress in accordance with all the latest achievements of fortification and military science of that time. Along the battlements of the walls there is a battle platform with a width of 2 to 4.5 meters.

Each tooth has a loophole, which can only be reached by standing on something else. The view from here is limited. The height of each battlement is 2-2.5 meters; the distance between them was covered with wooden shields during the battle. There are a total of 1145 battlements on the walls of the Moscow Kremlin.

The Moscow Kremlin is a great fortress located near the Moscow River, in the heart of Russia - in Moscow. The citadel is equipped with 20 towers, each with its own unique appearance and 5 passage gates. The Kremlin is like a ray of light carried through rich history formation of Russia.

These ancient walls are witnesses to all the numerous events that happened to the state, starting from the moment of its construction. The fortress began its journey in 1331, although the word “Kremlin” was mentioned earlier.

Moscow Kremlin, infographics. Source: www.culture.rf. For a detailed view, open the image in a new browser tab.

Moscow Kremlin under different rulers

Moscow Kremlin under Ivan Kalita

In 1339-1340 Moscow Prince Ivan Danilovich, nicknamed Kalita (“money bag”), built an impressive oak citadel on Borovitsky Hill, with walls ranging from 2 to 6 m thick and no less than 7 m high. Ivan Kalita built a powerful fortress with a formidable appearance, but it stood less three decades and burned down during a terrible fire in the summer of 1365.

Moscow Kremlin under Dmitry Donskoy

The tasks of defending Moscow urgently required the creation of a more reliable fortress: the Moscow principality was in danger from the Golden Horde, Lithuania and the rival Russian principalities of Tver and Ryazan. The then reigning 16-year-old grandson of Ivan Kalita, Dmitry (aka Dmitry Donskoy), decided to build a fortress of stone - the Kremlin.

Construction of the stone fortress began in 1367, and the stone was mined nearby, in the village of Myachkovo. The construction was completed in a short time - in just one year. Dmitry Donskoy made the Kremlin a white-stone fortress, which enemies tried to storm more than once, but were never able to.

What does the word "Kremlin" mean?

One of the first mentions of the word “Kremlin” appears in the Resurrection Chronicle in a report about a fire in 1331. According to historians, it could have arisen from the ancient Russian word “kremnik,” which meant a fortress built of oak. According to another point of view, it is based on the word “krom” or “krom”, which means boundary, border.

The first victory of the Moscow Kremlin

Almost immediately after the construction of the Moscow Kremlin, Moscow was besieged by the Lithuanian prince Olgerd in 1368, and then in 1370. The Lithuanians stood at the white stone walls for three days and three nights, but the fortifications turned out to be impregnable. This instilled confidence in the young Moscow ruler and allowed him to later challenge the powerful Golden Horde Khan Mamai.

In 1380, feeling reliable rears behind them, the Russian army under the leadership of Prince Dmitry ventured on a decisive operation. Having left their hometown far to the south, to the upper reaches of the Don, they met Mamai’s army and defeated it on the Kulikovo field.

Thus, for the first time, Krom became a stronghold not only of the Moscow principality, but of all of Rus'. And Dmitry received the nickname Donskoy. For 100 years after the Battle of Kulikovo, the white-stone citadel united the Russian lands, becoming the main center of Rus'.

Moscow Kremlin under Ivan 3

The current dark red appearance of the Moscow Kremlin owes its birth to Prince Ivan III Vasilyevich. Started by him in 1485-1495. the grandiose construction was not a simple reconstruction of the dilapidated defensive fortifications of Dmitry Donskoy. The white stone fortress is being replaced by a red brick fortress.

The towers are pushed outward in order to fire along the walls. To quickly move the defenders, a system of secret underground passages was created. Completing the system of impregnable defense, the Kremlin was made into an island. On both sides it already had natural barriers - the Moscow and Neglinnaya rivers.

They also dug a ditch on the third side, where Red Square is now, approximately 30-35 meters wide and 12 m deep. Contemporaries called the Moscow Kremlin an outstanding military engineering structure. Moreover, the Kremlin is the only European fortress that has never been taken by storm.

The special role of the Moscow Kremlin as a new grand-ducal residence and the main fortress of the state determined the nature of its engineering and technical appearance. Built from red brick, it retained the layout features of the ancient Russian detinets, and in its outlines the already established shape of an irregular triangle.

At the same time, the Italians made it extremely functional and very similar to many fortresses in Europe. What Muscovites came up with in the 17th century turned the Kremlin into a unique architectural monument. The Russians just built on stone tents, which turned the fortress into a light structure, directed towards the sky, which has no equal in the world, and corner towers took on the appearance that our ancestors knew that it was Russia that would send the first man into space.

Architects of the Moscow Kremlin

The construction was supervised by Italian architects. Memorial plaques installed on Spasskaya Tower of the Moscow Kremlin, indicate that it was built in the “30th summer” of the reign of Ivan Vasilyevich. The Grand Duke celebrated the anniversary of his state activities with the construction of the most powerful entrance front tower. In particular, Spasskaya and Borovitskaya designed by Pietro Solari.

In 1485, under the leadership of Antonio Gilardi, a powerful Taynitskaya Tower. In 1487, another Italian architect, Marco Ruffo, began to build Beklemishevskaya, and later Sviblova (Vodovzvodnaya) appeared on the opposite side. These three structures set the direction and rhythm for all subsequent construction.

The Italian origin of the main architects of the Moscow Kremlin is not accidental. At that time, it was Italy that came to the fore in the theory and practice of fortification construction. Design features indicate that its creators were familiar with the engineering ideas of such outstanding representatives of the Italian Renaissance as Leonardo da Vinci, Leon Battista Alberti, and Filippo Brunelleschi. In addition, it was the Italian architectural school that “gave” Stalin's skyscrapers in Moscow.

By the beginning of the 1490s, four more blind towers appeared (Blagoveshchenskaya, 1st and 2nd Nameless and Petrovskaya). All of them, as a rule, repeated the line of the old fortifications. The work was carried out gradually, in such a way that there were no open areas in the fortress through which the enemy could suddenly attack.

In the 1490s, the construction was curated by the Italian Pietro Solari (aka Pyotr Fryazin), with whom his compatriots Antonio Gilardi (aka Anton Fryazin) and Aloisio da Carcano (Aleviz Fryazin) worked. 1490-1495 The following towers have been added to the Moscow Kremlin: Konstantino-Eleninskaya , Spasskaya , Nikolskaya , Senate , Corner Arsenalnaya And Nabatnaya.

Secret passages in the Moscow Kremlin

In case of danger, the Kremlin defenders had the opportunity to quickly move through secret underground passages. In addition, internal passages were built in the walls, connecting all the towers. The Kremlin defenders could thus concentrate as necessary on a dangerous section of the front or retreat in the event of a superiority of enemy forces.

Long ones were also dug underground tunnels, thanks to which it was possible to observe the enemy in the event of a siege, as well as make unexpected attacks on the enemy. Several underground tunnels went beyond the Kremlin.

Some towers had more than just a defensive function. For example, Taynitskaya hid a secret passage from the fortress to the Moscow River. In Beklemishevskaya, Vodovzvodnoy and Arsenalnaya, wells were made, with the help of which water could be delivered if the city was under siege. The well in Arsenalnaya has survived to this day.

Over the course of two years, the fortresses rose in orderly ranks Kolymazhnaya (Komendantskaya) And Faceted (Medium Arsenalnaya), and in 1495 the construction of Trinity began. The construction was led by Aleviz Fryazin.

Chronology of events

Of the year	Event
1156	The first wooden citadel was erected on Borovitsky Hill
1238	The troops of Khan Batu marched through Moscow, as a result, most of the buildings were burned. In 1293, the city was once again ravaged by the Mongol-Tatar troops of Duden
1339-1340	Ivan Kalita built mighty oak walls around the Kremlin. From 2 to 6 m in thickness and up to 7 m in height
1367-1368	Dmitry Donskoy built a white stone fortress. The white stone Kremlin shone for more than 100 years. Since then, Moscow began to be called “white stone”
1485-1495	Ivan III the Great built a red brick citadel. The Moscow Kremlin is equipped with 17 towers, the height of the walls is 5-19 m, and the thickness is 3.5-6.5 m
1534-1538	A new ring of fortress defensive walls was built, called Kitay-Gorod. From the south, the walls of Kitai-Gorod adjoined the walls of the Kremlin at the Beklemishevskaya Tower, from the north – to the Corner Arsenalnaya
1586-1587	Boris Godunov surrounded Moscow with two more rows of fortress walls, called the Tsar City, and later the White City. They covered the area between modern central squares and the Boulevard Ring
1591	Another ring of fortifications, 14 miles long, was built around Moscow, covering the territory between the Boulevard and Garden Rings. Construction was completed within one year. The new fortress was named Skorodoma. So Moscow was enclosed in four rings of walls, which had a total of 120 towers

All towers of the Moscow Kremlin