FOUNDED IN 1882, THE PRINCETON University Art Museum now holds collections of over 72,000 works of art spanning the globe and some four thousand years of world history. Works in the collections surely number among the first to be assembled by an American university since Princeton began collecting objects soon after its establishment as the College of New Jersey in 1746. One of the earliest masterpieces was Charles Willson Peale’s portrait of George Washington, commissioned by the University trustees in 1783 in recognition of the hero’s role in the American Revolution and his generosity in contributing fifty guineas to the struggling College.

Collecting continues unabated today, thanks to both the generosity of many collectors and the endowments established over many decades. But with some of the finest collections of any American museum, including particularly rich holdings in Pre-Columbian art and in photography, and with troubling gaps in other areas, what should the Museum collect, for whom, and with what goals in mind?

These are among the key questions the curators and I regularly ask ourselves as we consider how to build on the achievements of past decades with posterity ever in our minds. The privilege of having resources for purchase nearly unique among American university museums is also a great responsibility, requiring that we use these resources to best effect for future generations. Beginning in the summer of 2009, we undertook a series of conversations to consider how to develop a collecting strategy. Supplementing the collecting policies that govern how we collect, this strategy will suggest what, and why.

These conversations continue, and are unlikely ever to be completed, as they must inevitably adapt to changing possibilities and circumstances. But a number of key concepts have emerged:

• Building on our strengths. With fine holdings in ancient Greek and Roman art, Maya art, European painting, photography, and prints and drawings, works from particular periods, cultures, or artists will be sought to build on existing contexts, including, for example, works such as the Mochican chisel (A.D. 600–800) from the north coast of Peru, which we were able to purchase in late 2009 as a fine addition to our Andean metalwork holdings, or the late Yuan dynasty handscroll attributed to Wang Zhenpeng, the Pavilion of Prince Teng, dated to 1312.
• Filling critical gaps. There are inevitably areas in which we find our holdings to be inadequate to our mission of teaching and research. Among the priorities are building up our small but rich collection of Japanese prints, enhancing our holdings in Indian miniatures, and deepening the collections from early modern Europe, hopefully with works by some of the great masters of the time, such as Braque, Léger, Gris, Mirò, or the Italian Futurists Severini and Boccioni. It was in this spirit that we made two of our most important acquisitions in 2010, the extraordinary portrait of Nicolas Perchet by Pierre-Paul Prud’hon, from 1795, and the exceptional Portrait of Sarah Harrop (Mrs. Bates) as a Muse by Angelica Kauffmann, from 1780–81.
  
• Acquiring works of the highest quality. Years ago it was said to be important to build a solid collection of works suitable for teaching but that might not otherwise meet the most rigorous standards of quality. With collections of breadth and depth, and challenges to the Museum’s galleries and storerooms, those days are long gone. We have thus recommitted ourselves to acquiring only works of superb quality, even if they represent less well-known artists. I believe that all of our recent acquisitions meet this criterion.
• Privileging use. We will prioritize works of art that are likely to be actively used in University teaching, regularly on view in our galleries, or frequently studied in our study rooms. There will—and to my mind should—remain room for the esoteric, even the peculiar, but emphasis will be placed on works that directly advance the University’s evolving teaching and research missions. Across such criteria, we remain committed to building on the distinction of the past—the legacy of collectors, benefactors, and museum professionals that we now safeguard for the future. Equally, we pledge ourselves to furthering the role of this unique Museum, one whose fundamental personality has been shaped by those same individuals and by the irreplaceable institution that is Princeton.
  

James Christen Steward Director