Is This From Taiwan?

Hi
Couldn't find this stamp.
Is it from Taiwan? is that the same as "Peoples Republic Of China"?
Is that some sort of arabic script below the kanji?
This stamp appears to not have any gum..is that normal?
Thx

China
Liberation of Tibet, Gord.

Gibbons:
SG1537 (1952) $1000 violet tibetan ploughing with Yaks

CV GBP5.50


Gum or No Gum? :
Numbers SG1401 to 1891 were issued without gum

So yours is orig

It is absolutely mainland China. Tibet Liberation issue March 15, 1952 Scott #135, the highest value in a set of 4.,

This stamp was issued in Mar.15,1952 by Peoples Republic of China, not Chinese Taiwan, Taiwan is a province of China, we are all Chinese.

That is Chinese characters with Tibetan characters in the stamp's design.

This stamp is no gum as issued.

I guess you would know better than most Zhang Cheng

Thanks for the info

they all said the same thing.. very neat.

Taiwanese stamps from this time period say "Republic of China" on it in English.

This is a very common misunderstanding, and Scott compounds the problem by making erroneous/misleading section titles. My purpose is not to correct anyone's terminology, as the current use has become so widespread, but I did want you all to know the distinction (not just geopolitical, but there is actually a philatelic distinction as well).

As Zhang Cheng stated, Taiwan is a province, not a country. The geopolitical disagreement is whether Taiwan belongs to the People's Republic of China or the Republic of China (please note, I am neutral on this issue, as I have close interaction with Chinese from both groups).

Stamps inscribed "Republic of China" were issued by the Republic of China. They are NOT Taiwanese, even though Scott erroneously labels them as "Taiwan" in the main listing in 1949. Stamps actually issued for Taiwan were from about 1945-1950, corresponding to end of Japanese occupation and the later withdrawal of Nationalist forces to Taiwan. Taiwan stamps are either inscribed or overprinted Taiwan in traditional Chinese script. These stamps can be found under a DIFFERENT section title of "Taiwan" in the Republic of China after the main listings and before the Occupation listings. This section is correctly entitled "Taiwan".

When the Nationalists completed their withdrawal to Taiwan, separate stamps for Taiwan were discontinued because Taiwan was the only major province still being held by the Nationalist forces. Sorry I don't have pics of the Scott catalog to show the incorrect and the correct section titles. Did I confuse everybody?

If not, then read on...

Even though Scott lists stamps under Republic of China with a subtitle in parentheses for Taiwan starting in 1949, the fact is that the Republic of China was established in 1911 along with the overthrow of the Ching (Qing) Dynasty, not in 1949. Scott has a small title "Issues of the Republic" inserted in its listings at 1912. Beginning in 1912, stamps of China were either overprinted or inscribed with Republic of China in Chinese script. That is where the "Republic of China" title should be in the Scott catalog, instead of 1949. In 1949, the Nationalist forces of the Republic of China fled the mainland to the island province of Taiwan (ceded by Japan in 1945). The Communist forces of the People's Republic of China had complete control of the mainland. It has essentially been status quo since then.

Regarding the English inscription "Republic of China" -- I believe these first appeared on stamps in 1953, but only intermittently. If I remember correctly, the English inscription did not start appearing on every ROC stamp until the late 1960s.

OK, I know nobody will remember all that.

Just remember, as Zhang Cheng stated, Taiwan is a province of China. Actual Taiwan stamps are in a subsection after the main listings for the Republic of China. It has become commonplace for many Americans to use Taiwan and Republic of China interchangeably, but technically they are not the same thing.

Thanks for a great explanation, k.

Thanks for your patience in reading it, smauggie!

Now I've really got to get back to moving...

Actually, I believe you have a reprint. You can confirm by either measuring the perf or examining the design beneath the "1" in "1000".

Reprint:
-- perf 14
-- very small Chinese character in design just beneath the "1" in "1000" (I think, but don't remember exactly, for that particular stamp it is supposed to be the Chinese character for "big"; you can use Google Translate to see what that character looks like; it is the same in both traditional and simplified script; don't hold me to the exact character, but there is definitely some very small character there in the reprints).

Original:
-- perf 12.5 (typically rough perf)
-- no Chinese character

This is the character for 'big':



Though checking the perfs is probably easier on the eyes ...

Ya but not checking it was easier on my bank account...lol
Thanks all for the great info

Thanks, Tony. That's a BIG big!

Ironically, I only have the original stamps for that set, and not the more common reprints. It might be a different character, but I believe that is the correct character for that stamp. But Tony is right, checking the perfs is easier, and your pic does look like it is perf 14.

Even if it is a reprint, it's still a nice stamp! Thanks for posting it.

k