Featured Sampler ID. Original? Origin?

Purchased this for $1.25 at a thrift store in Guatemala. I assume because of the crowns that the design is British?

 

I think that’s a woven repro. It’s nowhere near fine enough, or with enough colour and stitch variations.

 

Agree something doesn't look quite right. Including the surname.

Debora

 

Thanks. I was hoping that repros would go for the more colorful samplers and not one with an odd name like that. Marcall? Marfcall?
I still like it. Looks good in my kitchen.

 

It might be using the archaic form of "long s" in the surname - Mascall.

But I agree that all other features look quite modern/repro.

 

Mascall sounds right.

 

What was that store ?Old America ? They sold things like this.

 

I'd like to see both the frame and the back.

Debora

 

ya gotta ask yerself......why is the J missing !!

in 1796.....that would never have passed muster !

 

When you look at alphabetized lists from that period, words starting with I & those starting with J are ordered as if they all started with the same letter.

 

then explain to me the J in the word June..?

 

I kinda see what u mean.......but then I don't...

 

I’m going to dissent and say it’s possible that this is a true piece. Very simply done in all cross-stitches, it doesn’t show much in the way of accomplishment but could’ve been done by someone very young. It is not all that uncommon for the letter J to be missing in 18th century samplers.
I, too, would like to see photos of the back.
https://rugsandpugs.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-missing-letter-j.html
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/american-samplers

 

Interesting. Why would the omit the letter J?
Edit... Sorry. Just read your link.

It also refers to the letter s looking like an f. It says it is an American printers s, so the piece is probably American. This link shows this and 'mascall' looks favourite.

https://www.rd.com/article/long-s-u... the long S,myths that most Americans believe.

 

Though J was often represented by an I, I wonder if in this case it is simply a mistake? U V W X Y and Z in the lower case section are all much larger, almost capitals letters, again why?
This piece doesn't appear to have any age to it, not a stain, discolouration, a hole, frayed edge or corners. To my mind, it seems to be a modern copy.

Odd I know for a man who collects weapons, but I could easilly collect samplers. I think that they are absolutely fascinating.

 

It simply doesn't look right. One just doesn't see the effort of a young woman practicing her art. Nor does it show the wear one would expect. More photographs please.

Debora

 

The letters I, J & Y sort of shuffle around, depending on the language. Think of all the words that start with yod in Hebrew that start with J in English. Italian io is the Spanish yo, which some Spanish speakers pronounce like Joe. The German Johannes could be written with a Y as far as an English speaker is concerned, while it is written with an I in Latin. And so on. My quite contemporary books on a collection of engraved gems writes the plural of genio (genius) as genj, although they could also have used genii.

 

Enlarging the photo on my computer, I can see some areas that look like there are holes. But they have been backed with a fabric with a similar thread count (or repaired by needle weaving/darning). The photos are not clear enough to be sure what is going on -



The damage raises some other questions. The cloth used for samplers was typically linen, which would not be attractive to insects. But the holes look like the work of insects, which would be more consistent with a wool fabric.

I wonder if the piece has been professionally repaired and mounted. It might have been washed (and thus any stains reduced). It appears to be mounted with a muslin backing (in addition to whatever may have been used behind the holes), and the turnback at the edges looks rounded/padded, which would be typical of a modern conservation mounting.

 

there seem to me to be too many discrepancies ......

 

It appears from the photos provided to look like it is wool thread stitched on linen.
Keep in mind that not all samplers were pretty, finely-done things stitched in silks... many were done with more cheaply/widely available wool threads, and with much simpler designs such as this. The younger girls, the poorer girls, the country girls wouldn't be using the finer threads, nor stitching the finer (more collectable and currently more valuable) designs.
I do wonder if it was cleaned and repaired/backed at some point.
I also agree that it's still possible that it's a more modern copy though, as OP has said, it's not a style that would generally be copied.
More photos will be helpful.