One often thinks of the "Red book" as the first standard guide

1630Boston

One often thinks of the "Red book" as the first standard guide, but Dickeson is the true eye opener. Here is the straw man, the first attempt at a comprehensive overview of American coinage. While the plates look like play money and technical errors abound (for example, the 1797 half dollar is unlisted), Dickeson represents a necessary stepping stone in American numismatic scholarship. An accumulative science by definition evolves, and Dickeson could have done much worse as he drew upon the few written sources along with personal contacts in the nascent numismatic community. The result was the first comprehensive, illustrated view of aboriginal, colonial, federal, pattern, and territorial coinage. While modern guides are far more accurate (and affordable), they do not convey the wonder of birth that one senses in Dickeson. Voted #70 of the top one hundred items of numismatic literature by the Numismatic Bibliomania Society.

Note: the first edition (1859) is titled the American Numismatical Manual. Later, "numismatical" was shortened to "numiismatic."
.

.
.
When you have time, it's an interesting 344 pages here :https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/512402?page=132

ricko

That is one that I do not have in my library... and not likely to get. @1630Boston, Thanks for the link. Cheers, RickO

carabonnair

Interesting reading. The size scale used (on page 30) is Mionnet's, slightly modified by Dickeson. https://www.sizes.com/units/mionnet.htm

I like his comment under 1794 half dollars: "The number coined we are unable to state, though it must have been much greater than of the dollar. Though getting to be scarce, they command but a small premium, being much worn. It is rare to find perfect specimens in circulation."

Coinosaurus

Ken Bressett didn't put a full page portrait of himself in the Red Book

1630Boston

Appears he was a medical doctor also
.
.
.
.
.