Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
15 Kopecks
| Issuer | Russian Empire Treasury |
|---|---|
| Year | 1915 |
| Type | Standard circulation banknote |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Size | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Printer | Log in to see details |
| Designer(s) | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse lettering | ПОЧТА Николай II 15 КОП 15 КОП (Translation: MAIL / Nicholas II / 15 KOP 15 KOP) |
| Reverse description | The reverse is printed in black on plain light pink paper within a double-rule rectangular border. At the top centre sits a small typeset Imperial double-headed eagle. Below, a multi-line Cyrillic text in a large serif typeface states that the note circulates on a par with silver subsidiary coinage, occupying the lower two-thirds of the field. |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Signature(s) | Log in to see details |
| Protection type | Log in to see details |
| Protection description | Log in to see details |
| Variants | Log in to see details |
| Comments |
Russia's Treasury notes of 1915 filled a gap left by the near-total disappearance of silver coinage from circulation — the public was hoarding coin as the war drained the economy and public confidence collapsed simultaneously. These small-denomination paper pieces effectively replaced the coins, which is why they were printed in coin-sized formats. The State Duma had authorised the suspension of the 1897 gold standard in late July 1914, and by mid-1915 the monetary system was visibly fracturing.
The printed date in the metadata — 30 April 1945 — is certainly a cataloguing error rather than a press date. No credible production record places this issue anywhere near that year.