1725 ruble, from reputable German dealer, currently listed on ebay.

listed as Bitkin 72 "ff" but its definitely not. Closest seems to be Bitkin 112, does anyone agree? The hair on the shoulder does not look right, but could it be from wear? or tis this a variant obverse? Note spelling of Ekaterina Imperatritsa .

The spelling variations are not unusual.

GM-43 (plate IV, 7) has "ЕКАТЕРІНА ІМПЕРАТРИЦА" but
GM-44 (plate IV, 8) has "ЕКАТЕРИНА ІМПЕРАТРІЦА".

The style looks okay to me and I think it is probably genuine. There are almost an infinite number of variants for Catherine I.

Thanks Grivna. Im not thinking its fake, more wondering about the attribute. The spelling on this coin seems the less common version(2nd ex, your GM spelling), but by not any more scarce, by bitkin. I was thinking planchet flaw at the gown might extend up to the hair, and was re-engraved? hard to tell by the photo. Its a pleasant looking coin, otherwise. Wouldnt mind it, but within 5 minutes of my post, the bids shot up. still a week to go...

Here is one that's not in GM. The toughest spelling of them all, not a single И in the entire legend. Bitkin 82, Diakov 24 (no picture).

The coin is much closer to GM 5.2 (Diakov 46). Bitkin is not really a die veriety catalog. Diakov is much better at it.
The gown damage is a little scary. If you look on the other side of the coin in the same place, you will see that the letter P (in SPB) is missing and the area there is rough. So it could be a repaired hole.

Thank you IgorS. I hadnt considered a repair, but could be! Definitely some kind of problem there. Otherwise, an honest coin, I think.

Your example is very nice! Interesting spelling variety, and great portrait.

Thank you.

BTW, I do like the Ebay seller who has the coin you posted. I know him personally and he certainly is an honest guy.

Thank you. That is good to know!

I don't recall seeing one of these before and assume it is a rare die variety.

The use of "І" and "И" (at least on the coins as seen in this thread) suggests that these letters were considered equivalent and interchangeable (at least by the die engravers). Was that the case, or is this simply the result of illiteracy at the mint?

If this usage was considered correct in 1725, is that still the case in modern Russian?

As a native English speaker, it is difficult for me to read archaic English (e.g. Chaucer) because of the wierd and inconsistent spelling (it seems almost anything was considered correct). It is so different that it almost seems like a different language than modern English.

I wonder if native Russian speakers have a similar experience when reading the Russian language as it was used in 1725?