The Bank of Russia paused the introduction of the redesigned 1,000 ruble banknote, a move announced on October 16 and posted on the organizer’s website.
Officials explained that the issuance is being halted for the time being and that the publication footprint was limited. The decision was framed as a temporary measure rather than a permanent cancellation.
It’s about the cross
At a recent press conference, Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Russia Sergei Belov unveiled the new 1,000 and 5,000 ruble notes. While the color scheme remained consistent with previous issues, the designs on the notes themselves were updated.
The 1,000 ruble note features blue and green tones. The front showcases the Nikolskaya Tower of the Nizhny Novgorod Kremlin, while the back highlights landmarks in Kazan, including the State Historical Museum of the Tatar People, the Syuyumbike Tower of the Kazan Kremlin, and the Museum of Archeology and Ethnography in Ufa.
A critic of the redesign, Pavel Ostrovsky, a priest, blogger, and television host, addressed the change via a Telegram channel. He questioned the imagery chosen and warned against provoking religious sentiment, remarking that a crescent and a church dome without a cross on the banknote could stir controversy.
The State History Museum of the Tatar People and the Republic of Tatarstan occupy a building dating back to the 17th century. There were plans to place a palace or a church on the site, but the structure was rebuilt in a later century. It suffered two fires, was looted in 1918, and repurposed as a canteen before being restored in 2002 and turned into a museum. The dome remains, yet the cross is not displayed.
The crescent-shaped element associated with the Syuyumbike Tower, historically used as a guard post, became a notable symbol after changes in 1918 that replaced the previous double-headed eagle with a crescent. Today it stands as a major tourist site.
Ostrovsky argued that most Russians who handle this currency would not know the full history of the Kazan Kremlin. To them, the banknote would simply appear as a temple without a cross and a minaret with a crescent.
He attributed the choice to either design blunders or possible provocation by supporters connected to the region.
“Irrational and even provocative”
Vladimir Legoida, head of the Synodal Department for Church Relations with Society, media, and the Moscow Patriarchate, urged more careful image selection for banknotes to prevent unnecessary tension. He suggested that the imagery should not spark disagreement where none might exist.
Andrei Klishas, chair of the Constitutional Legislation and State-Building Committee, echoed the view, stating that a temple without a cross evokes memories of atheistic eras and that placing such depictions on currency is illogical and provocative. He expressed hope that similar incidents would not recur.
“No problem”
Speaking on a radio program, Vakhtang Kipshidze, deputy head of the Synodal Department for church-society relations and media, downplayed the issue. He argued that Orthodox monuments, churches, and bell towers already carry meaning; if the banknote omits a cross present in life, it does not inherently constitute blasphemy. He wondered why a cross would be included if it wasn’t part of the real world context.
In a separate interview, Liliya Khairutdinova, a leading expert at the State Historical Museum of the Tatar People, explained that the dome’s cross had disappeared for more than a century. The palace church on the site was built in the 19th century, and over time its function changed with political shifts. The dome’s shape remains, though the cross is absent. Khairutdinova noted that she did not know the bulletins were connected to the thousand-ruble bill but hoped the note would attract tourists rather than spark conflict.
Overall, the discussions pointed to a broader debate about how national heritage and religious symbolism are represented in everyday currency, and how such choices are interpreted by a diverse public. The exchange reflects a tension between preserving historical memory and modernizing national symbols for a wide audience.