04-22-2022 05:55 PM
04-23-2022 07:43 AM
It is not a genuine reign mark. It is no older than the mid-20th Century, if it's that old.
Go here:
https://gotheborg.com/marks/20thcenturychina.shtml
Scroll down to the Kaishu (normal script) style Da Qing Qianlong Nian Zhi marks #282, #184, #313, etc. to see your mark, and for more info.
This is the correct orientation for your mark:
.
04-22-2022 08:23 PM
Families always say that. You have the marks upside down. You should show a pic of the entire piece.
04-22-2022 10:16 PM - edited 04-22-2022 10:18 PM
It is marked that it is supposed to be Qianlong - it isn't, it looks to be quite new, from what little I can see, rather than from the 18th century. There is no way that is 1736-95.
But, to answer your question, yes, there was a legitimate Chinese dynasty associated with that properly executed mark.
04-23-2022 07:43 AM
It is not a genuine reign mark. It is no older than the mid-20th Century, if it's that old.
Go here:
https://gotheborg.com/marks/20thcenturychina.shtml
Scroll down to the Kaishu (normal script) style Da Qing Qianlong Nian Zhi marks #282, #184, #313, etc. to see your mark, and for more info.
This is the correct orientation for your mark:
.