famille Noire vase

[Stan]

This is one I purchased a while back, it has a hair line crack on the top, here are the photo's, I would like your opinion on this as well Peter, thanks.

[Stan]

Sorry the hight is 43.8 cm and it is heavily potted.

[peterp]

Hi Stan,
It is impossible to be completely sure but I believe yours would be later. I explain below.
The other vase has the classic proportions of the Kangxi vase. Did you note that your vase has a proportionally greater neck diameter and a rounded shoulder? I do not know if both these shapes did exist at the same time.
Similarities are that both are Susancai (a variation of fencai using fewer colors) which was prominent in the Kangxi reign. The other vase has white edges, yours has not. The white edge seems to be typical for Kangxi, but I do not know if all such vases had them. (I have seen a blue and white vase of this type and the decoration had painted lines to simulate the white edges. So this could mean it is an important part of this type of decoration.
What I consider most important is the prunus blossom decoration. If you check the other vase, there is one branch and all smaller twigs fork out from this one. Yours has some twigs that are placed there without showing the branch which they are attached to. Then there are the blossoms themselves. The other vase shows the typical Kangxi way of painting them, with yours this is not shown clearly. Look at their detail, shape and - most important - the grouping of the blossoms, which is typical for Kangxi with the other vase. All of these differences give the impression that the decoration could have been a later copy. Prunus decorations of the Kangxi revival period often do not show this specific grouping of blossoms, which is one of the features used to differentiate them.
Then the glazed area inside the base is much more recessed than what I know. And last there is the mark. Yours has a Kangxi six character mark. I have doubts about that. In the early Kangxi years the Qing government had no time for such things, as they were still consolidating their power (fighting against the Ming remnants), but in the late Kangxi reign the use of official marks (reign marks) by private kilns was prohibited by the court. The other vase does not have a reign mark so their is no problem, but yours has. Further, fencai enamels (to which Susancai belongs) were only appearing in the late Kangxi reign, at the same time when the reign marks were prohibited. So this vase would not be allowed to use the reign mark in that period unless it was imperial ware.
I think you understand my reasoning.
This all leaves doubts about your vase being mark and period.

[Stan]

Thanks Peter, I had my doubts that it wasn't of the period thanks for confirming.