Collections

Search Constraints

Start Over You searched for: Creator Tucker-Coleman Family Remove constraint Creator: Tucker-Coleman Family Level Collection Remove constraint Level: Collection

Search Results

Nathaniel Beverley Tucker Papers

0.50 Linear Feet
Abstract Or Scope

Comprised mostly of letters to, from, and about Nathaniel Beverley Tucker (1820-1890), a Virginian journalist and diplomat, his son Beverley Dandridge Tucker (1846-1930), a bishop, and their friends and family dating between 1830 and 1903. Family correspondents include Charles Ellis, Thomas H. Ellis, and Powhatan Ellis (brothers of Jane Shelton (Ellis) Tucker); Virginia Sarah Tucker Brooke, sister of Nathaniel Beverley Tucker ; Jane Shelton (Ellis) Tucker, wife Nathaniel Beverley Tucker; Anna Maria Washington Tucker, daughter of John Augustine Washington and wife of Beverley Dandridge Tucker; and Beverley Dandridge Tucker and Charles Ellis Tucker, sons of Nathaniel Beverley Tucker. Notable correspondents include Franklin Pierce, Jefferson Davis, John Slidell, Sidney Webster, J.G. Blaine, Walker Blaine, Judah P. Benjamin, Stephen Massett, Hamilton Fish, Benjamin Harrison, and Stephen D. Lee.

1 result

Nathaniel Beverley Tucker Papers 0.50 Linear Feet

Tucker-Coleman papers

124.00 Linear Feet
Abstract Or Scope

Papers, primarily 1770-1907, of the Tucker and Coleman families of Williamsburg, Winchester, Lexington, Staunton and Richmond, including papers of: St. George Tucker (1752-1827), Nathaniel Beverley Tucker (1784-1851), Henry St. George Tucker (1780-1848), Ann Frances Bland (Tucker) Coalter (1779-1813), John Coalter (1769-1838), and John Randolph of Roanoke (commonplace book is in box 64B), as well as other family members.

1 result

Tucker-Coleman papers 124.00 Linear Feet

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.