Search

Start Over Date range 1939 Creator Schaffer Collection

Lillian Thomas Pratt Personal Papers (SC-07), 1901/1947 1.5 Linear Feet 2 boxes (15 folders), 1 oversize item and 1 binder

Pratt, Lillian Thomas, 1876?
The collection documents the formation of the Lillian Thomas Pratt Collection of Fabergé decorative artworks at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Bequeathed to the museum upon her death in 1947, Pratt's Fabergé collection consistently remains one of the highlights of the museum's permanent collection. Pratt purchased most of her Fabergé collection from the Schaffer Collection and Hammer Galleries, both of New York City, in the 1930s and 1940s. Comprised of correspondence, invoices, price tags, and detailed item descriptions, this collection illuminates Pratt's mind as a collector, as well as her relationship with one of her dealers, Alexander Schaffer.
  1. Virginia Museum of Fine Arts

Series 1: Schaffer Collection, 1934/1947 370 items Box 1 (6 Folders and 1 Binder)

This series is comprised of correspondence, invoices, price tags, and item descriptions that detail the purchases Pratt made from the Schaffer collection in the 1930s and 1940s. Correspondence between Alexander S. Schaffer, his wife Ray Schaffer, and Pratt discuss sales, payments, display cabinets, family matters, and books and articles he sent to Pratt about Russian history, war, and family matters. After 1944, some of the correspondence, invoices and item descriptions came from A La Vieille Russie, where Schaffer continued to deal in Russian art and antiquities after closing his own shop.

  1. Virginia Museum of Fine Arts
  2. Lillian Thomas Pratt Personal Papers (SC-07), 1901/1947

Content Warning

ARVAS is an aggregator of archival resources. ARVAS does not have control of the descriptive language used in our members’ finding aids.

Finding aids may contain historical terms and phrases, reflecting the shared attitudes and values of the community from which they were collected, but are offensive to modern readers. These include demeaning and dehumanizing references to race, ethnicity, and nationality; enslaved or free status; physical or mental ability; religion; sex; and sexual orientation and gender identity.

Many institutions and organizations are in the process of reviewing and revising their descriptive language, with the intent to describe materials in more humanizing, inclusive, and harm-reductive ways. As members revise their descriptive language, their changes will eventually be reflected in their ARVAS finding aids.