What did I buy? Old and large embroidery.

Bought this today in a second hand store. I don't know what it is or what it was used for.

But I thought if somebody spend so much money to get it framed than it must be worth something?

Its massive (2.5 x 1.5 meter).

I tried to research it but no luck as I have no experience with embroideries. Can somebody help and point me to the right direction so that I can gather more info about it. Thank you

 

Wild guess, baby blanket? I’m old lady still have mine
Wait, 2 meters, that’s not for babies ☺️

 

It’s unusual that is not one large piece of fabric, I can see being sawn to joint two. Is the stitching in the middle? Does green embroidery looks like Christmas tree?

 

Fabric it is, but embroidery it does not appear to be.

 

Probably emotional connection, a memory.

 

Usually we try to have one large piece to embroidered on. Some PCs I seen from my grandma that were joined together ware due to saving the fabric and minimize the waste.

 

60”x98” it’s like queen size bed.

 

Can we see how the reverse side is joined at seam? Strange that it's in narrow strips.

 

Yes I also noticed this. It is made from several pieces which are joint together.

I was thinking it could have been a bedding bed sheet cover.

I have these pictures attached of the back. Its is made from several bigger pieces (maybe 7 pieces) to great one big piece. I therefore dont think this was machine made but rather all hand made fabric and than joint together to create one big piece and than hand stitched embroidered design.

The fabric appears to be linen and the stitching work is silk I think.

It appear to be very old fabric and the needlework design has discolored. I think it was much much brighter when it was made.

 

I wasn't much interested when this was initially posted, but now it's intriguing.

 

The general pattern of your textile looks like a design from the region of India/Pakistan/Persia/Turkey, and the specific technique looks like Kashmiri "kashida" work, a type of chain stitch embroidery worked with a hook. We recently had another piece on the forum that was probably from Kashmir, showing the similar stitch:
https://www.antiquers.com/threads/antique-embroidery-from-pakistan.60512/#post-3853314

 

Very interesting from the back. I can't see stitches close enough to say anything about that; however... the fact that it is made in strips is curious... and the pattern ends at the joins...and then resumes after the join is interesting.

Leslie

 

The last photo in the last series is the most informative on the stitching. Click on it and it will load in another window, where it can be enlarged. The blue figures are worked primarily in a closely aligned chain stitch, like Kashmiri kashida, and the white figures in couched stitches.

I think the side of the textile where the chain stitching goes over the seams (at least the seams between the center panel and the narrow borders) is meant to be the front. In other words, photo #2 is the back of the textile, and the last photo is the front. But it is difficult to understand the layout from the photos provided.

 

Hi everyone,
Well, pulling up the photos in a larger size helped. I'm posting these observations just as points to consider as my expertise is truly lace; and from a lace standpoint I'm looking at how it could be hand rather than machine...

#1. I can see where someone running this chain stitch by hand; may have run it a bit cockeyed rather than leave a gap; where as machine may have just run over the spot and made two stitches in the same place.
#2. Each of these points (all around the serpentine vine) are all made differently - ie; stitches not completely repetitive... it seems to me that a machine would have a set pattern.
#3. Appears to be a knot or slug. If it is a knot; it is a BIG vote for hand done. If it is a slug (ie: a twisted up part of the thread)... perhaps more likely to be machine - particularly if this is on the front side as a handworker would have tried to remove it had it been on the front side.
#4. (not numbered) crescent shape. To me this is a vote for hand done; although I suppose machines can be programmed - but early as this appears to be; I don't know how programmable early machines would have been. But looking at how this was stitched; it makes sense for the center to have been worked back and forth and then the outside chain stitched. I'm not sure that it would have had a chain stitch edge, if it was machine stitched. It may have just been omitted.
#5. This looks like a twisted chain stitch. Meaning that if it was hand done; the worker broke his rhythm and got his stitch twisted. I don't think a machine would do that.

One last point. SOOO many repetitive chain stitches are different lengths. I feel like a machine would have been more consistent. Where as by hand; depending on who was working on it; and how long they'd been working on it; their stitch length would be more likely to vary over the course of a working day. If, this piece was made by an artisan; then it would probably have been important to stitch very quickly. Hence; different chain stitch lengths. If you are a hand sewer or quilter; you know how difficult it is to maintain the same size stitch throughout a piece. It requires a lot of concentration to maintain exact stitching; and really can only be accomplished if you have time to concentrate.

The fact that up close - stitches seem to go in all sorts of directions and there isn't repetitive continuity; speaks more "handmade" than machine. But as I said; I'm not an embroidery expert. So truly my observations are food for thought.

Cheerio Leslie