Kangxi mark Charger 16"

Started by smak, Apr 23, 2021, 03:10:03

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Hi all,

What do you guys think? I dont think its Kangxi, maybe Guangxu or earlier. It is 16 inches wide!


Your getting better on your photo's, but the bottom esp. the foot needs to be taken at a angle to see the slant on the outside foot.


Thanks Stan! I actually didnt take those, but what do you think of the  pictures so far?


For Kangxi it is not the 5 shades of blue I would like to see and the 4 character Kangxi mark was used in the Guangxu period, Late 19th century, although it was used in the Kangxi period, the 4 character mark was rarely used during that time, During the Kangxi period their was a lot of variations of blue used, the Kangxi period was one of the longest reigns in the Qing dynasty, A picture is needed of the foot to rightly know for sure.


Stan is right.
I red in some sources that this underglaze blue four character Kangxi mark (with four dots in the right bottom position), was used only in the late Qing (Guangzu) to early Republic period.
This mark is different from the Kangxi period ones an easily recognized, for this reason pieces with this mark are not to be considered as Kangxi fakes, but just made in Kangxi style, I think.
Other considerations on color, motif, quality, etc. are out of my knowledge.


Some considerations, as already mentioned by Stan and Adriano the four character Kangxi marks appeared mainly on Guangxu wares. In addition would like to say that according to my experience including domestic Chinese porcelain the four character Kangxi mark appeared mostly on export porcelain, not just any Guangxu porcelain.
The blue pigment used here is too dark for any period before that.

Further, the painting style seems to be different from most traditional styles. The leaves of the peonies and the birds are painted in more detail than common in the Qing dynasty, and I believe we can see some western influence in this, although this might be possible if made to order according to western design.
Then the foot rim color...we know that this is not a natural color, especially not in the late Qing dynasty. It appears often on later items made to look older. On the other hand the bit of the plate bottom visible makes it look as if it was an old porcelain body.

There is no side view allowing to check the plate shape. I got the impression that the flat part of the plate rim is more narrow than usual with Qing items. Is it?
Personally, when I look at this plate I would think it could be Japanese, given the design of the rim; does it not appear more like an Arita plate rim?  Overall the decoration style taste seems more to resemble Japanese than Chinese wares. Difficult to tell for sure, but I would recommend disregarding the apocryphal mark and age signs and have another try at finding this type of decoration among post-Qing or even Japanese ceramics.


Thank you all! I will take it as a Kangxi style charger!