The Bank of Russia’s release ends payment use of specified old notes and coins from 1 January 1999 and describes their exchange for 1997-series money at 1,000:1.

Its stated exchange horizon is historical policy; this dossier does not infer present redemption availability or a new ruble species from the scale change.

Russian national issues emerged from the inherited Soviet ruble system. Issuer history dates first Russian circulating issues to 1992. The exact legal separation and July 1993 exchange need a dedicated record.

The Russian ruble scale changed at 1,000 old rubles per new ruble.

Specified old-scale Russian cash ceased payment use after the transition year. Withdrawal does not create another currency; historical exchange rights are not current advice.

Russian ruble → Turkmen manat, 1993.

The Russian ruble identity includes the inherited Soviet ruble account continuity; the 1992 law and implementing resolution did not reset the accounting unit.

The July 1993 reform withdrew earlier banknote types, retained Soviet coins and required organizations to credit surrendered cash to existing accounts. This supports treating it as cash replacement within the ruble account continuity.

The Russian national ruble continues the inherited ruble account unit: the 1992 implementing resolution carries Soviet instruments into all payments and bank accounts at their nominal amounts. Issuer succession does not create a separate currency identity.

On 12 November 1992 Ukraine replaced the ruble with the Ukrainian karbovanets, converting balances and existing ruble contracts 1:1 and requiring accounting in karbovantsi. The January coupon issue alone is not its unit boundary.

Georgia introduced the coupon in the ruble system in April 1993 and made it the sole legal means in August. Subsequent law converts coupon-denominated prices, assets and liabilities into lari, confirming that the coupon became an account unit.

Uzbek sum-coupons began as ruble-denominated cash in November 1993 and became a separately named accounting system by February 1994, when legal utility tariffs were stated in sum-coupons. Their ruble ancestry is explicit.

Tajikistan replaced the Russian ruble system with its national ruble on 10 May 1995. Prices and balance sheets were converted under the State Commission decision; Russian note circulation ended 15 May.

Moldova separated from the inherited ruble area in July 1993 through a de facto national ruble/coupon account currency; this predates its conversion into leu in November. The June 1992 coupon-note issue alone is not treated as the birth of a distinct unit.

Estonia introduced Soviet rubles at 1.25 rubles per kroon. Kroons temporarily co-circulated; the displayed ratio is kroons per ruble.

The Soviet ruble underwent monetary reform in 1947. No uniform conversion ratio asserted: cash, deposits and other claims require separate treatment.

The 1961 reform rescaled the Soviet ruble tenfold.

Estonia generally exchanged 10 rubles per kroon. Cash above 1,500 rubles used 50:1; do not apply 10:1 to every holding.

The Soviet currency system displaced the lats, withdrawn on 25 March 1941.

Latvian rubles entered alongside Soviet and Russian notes at 1:1. The inherited ruble-zone unit, not the later 1998 Russian ruble scale.

Soviet rubles entered Lithuania at 0.9 ruble per litas. The rate did not protect all deposits. Litas circulated alongside rubles until March 1941.

Lithuania replaced rubles with talonas at 1:1.

One 1922 ruble replaced 10,000 earlier paper rubles.

The 1922 conversion also accepted earlier tsar-era paper money. Conversion in the reform’s jurisdiction; not uniform acceptance across every civil-war territory.

One 1923 ruble replaced 100 rubles of 1922.

One treasury gold ruble replaced 50,000 rubles of the 1923 sovznak scale.

The 1947 reform ended the separate chervonets banknote unit. No universal cash-and-deposit conversion rate inferred.

Armenia introduced the dram against the Soviet rubles circulating locally in November 1993; some Soviet notes remained temporarily valid.

Azerbaijan introduced the manat alongside rubles in August 1992, prescribing ten rubles per manat in settlements; the manat became sole tender in 1994.

Ruble-zone currency → Belarusian ruble, 1992–1994.

Corrected interpretation: Revision 27 supplies a new evidence basis for R-V22-026. Ancestry is directly documented; the broad transition date remains intentional. Do not equate May 1992 coupon issue, May 1994 tender declaration and August 1994 denomination. Replacement evidence: C1622.

Ruble-zone currency → Kyrgyz som, 1993.

Ruble-zone currency → tenge, 1993.

Corrected interpretation: Revision 27 supplies a new evidence basis for R-V22-029. Direct statutory replacement establishes ancestry. Do not generalize a 500:1 ratio to every account from these two decrees, which do not specify that ratio. Replacement evidence: C1621.

Kazakhstan replaced inherited ruble currency with the tenge in November 1993: Decree 1399 establishes payments and deposits in tenge; Decree 1400 orders the outgoing ruble notes exchanged for it.

The Belarusian account rubel separated from the inherited ruble zone during 1992–1994. IMF chronology identifies a national noncash rubel in July 1992; the 1994 finance instruction concerns denomination of its assets and liabilities.

The 1993 instrument withdrawal adds no basis for splitting the 1992 inherited ruble account identity; retain the merger proposed in the main bundle.

The 4 February 1919 decree makes Soviet settlement signs equal to existing state credit notes for Treasury and private payments and records both together on the People's Bank balance sheet.

The 1922 ruble scale equals 10,000 rubles in credit notes and settlement signs of all prior issues. Bank of Russia history explicitly includes tsar-era money in this conversion.

Effective 1 May 1922, the Finance Commissariat converts balance sheets and accounting to the 1922 ruble scale, expressly preserving existing prices, rates, tariffs and obligations through the rescaling and prescribing the interpretation of old contracts.

Imperial state credit notes carry the inherited silver-ruble account; later gold redemption and its 1914 suspension alter convertibility. They do not by themselves establish a new account identity.

Finland introduced the markka as one quarter of a silver ruble in 1860, replacing rubles in accounts and transactions from 1863. A staged unit derivation within the Russian Empire, not instantaneous withdrawal of every Russian coin.

The later imperial silver ruble belongs to the ruble coinage tradition. Intermediate weight and tariff reforms remain untraced; no direct conversion factor asserted.

State credit notes used the silver-ruble unit and exchanged at face value.

Goznak reports that the wire-kopeck standard fell to 0.28 g in 1698 so that 100 kopecks corresponded to a thaler; its indexed account supports deliberate weight alignment.

Efimov documents imported thalers as Russian mint material and distinguishes official exchange rates, market rates and silver-content equivalence before and after Peter’s reform.

Gokhran describes thaler overstrikes as rubles in 1654 and countermarked thalers rated at 64 kopecks in 1655. Peter’s 1704 issue was not the first physical silver ruble.

HSE identifies PSZ III No.1616 as the 23 January 1698 decree concerning land grants to foreigners, not a kopeck-weight decree.

HSE identifies PSZ IV No.1969 as the 23 February 1704 decree concerning captured horses and their sale, not ruble coinage.

PSZ IV No.1950, printed p.228, is dated 19 November 1703 and orders a forest survey near rivers; the original scan does not support the claimed January 1704 monetary decree.

The reviewed evidence supports thaler influence on the existing ruble’s coinage standard, not a newly established thaler-to-ruble account-unit ancestry edge. The earlier-ruble to nineteenth-century identity boundary remains to be adjudicated.

During consolidation of Latvian-ruble legal tender, the Treasury exchanged tsar rubles at half a Latvian ruble each. This is a documented later local replacement input; it does not assert the1919 founding unit was genealogically derived from Russian rubles.

The Sudebnik measures litigation and judicial fees in rubles; article 30 names Moscow rubles. This establishes a local account unit before coinage of a ruble denomination. Its pre-unification association with the continuing Muscovite/Imperial profile remains qualified. Association with the later continuous currency identity remains qualified.

Glinskaya’s reform standardized the inherited monetary system; the ruble was an account quantity of 100 kopecks. Efimov traces this system into Peter’s reign.

Peter’s reform altered an existing ruble system and expressed inherited account denominations in coins. Surviving accounts distinguish old money accepted, new money issued, and profit.

The 1839 manifesto restores the 1810 rule, retains the current silver ruble and subdivisions, and requires public and private accounts on that basis; assignment rubles convert at 3.5 per silver ruble.

The nineteenth-century-only boundary is unwarranted:1530 saccount rubles continue through Peter’s reform;1839 preserves existing silver reckoning. Admit 1535–1538 as the earlier account anchor, with 1497 Moscow evidence a separately qualified extension.

Merge the separately scoped Imperial silver-ruble profile into the continuing Russian/Soviet ruble profile. The chain is silver-account credit notes, legally equivalent Soviet settlement notes, then explicit rescaling of accounts and contracts. Regime change, redemption suspension and rescaling do not independently create another currency under project policy.