Italy Stamp Imperf 1862-63 Is This Type I Or Type II, Please Help Me Identify?

italy stamp imperf 1862-63 is this type I or type II,please help me identify? also the reverse side has unusual tic-tac-toe like-lines..
and is on bluish imperf paper..

You have Type I.

Is the paper relatively thick? The paper color/texture of the front side is not the same as the back side. I think I can see parts of the "back paper" along these 2 sides: right side near top, and along the bottom side near right. I'm wondering if it is still on piece?

Someone else will need to chime in to explain the odd backside.

the paper is not relatively thick..khj..what do you mean by..still on pece?

It's quite obvious the stamp is still on a piece of paper

i can try soaking? and if I get real lucky.it will be printed on both sides..

The paper seems strange for 1863

Genova is a suberb in Italy..above the letter C and below the oval is the cancel number "6" just to the right possible number"4". I am assuming feb 1864..then again it may be 1867..?

What I meant is that it looks like the stamp is still on the piece of envelope. It appears to be tied by the cancel to backing piece (see the right curve of the cancel is it goes to the bottom side of the stamp).

The lettering, and the left oval look a little "strange" to me -- not exactly the same as the Type I stamps that I've seen in the past. Of course, I haven't seen that many Type I stamps. Maybe just differences in settings by position?

Does anyone know if this might be one of the two known postal forgeries for this issue? There's one I haven't seen before, and I'm wondering if this one might be it?

the cancellation has been studied further and the date reads 20th of feb 1867.Genova cancellation..forgery is out of the question..

Khj I just have a phone now but the c seems to be more closed because of black ink of a cancel. The line is partially broken under the Q I would like to see a closer scan of the c . I check for reprint and they seems to not exist for the 15 .

the stamp came from my scott intl jr edition ..see page attachment..
see arrow on page..

The postal forgery is called a postal forgery because it was actually used as postage. It was created to deceive the postal service, not collectors. The postal forgeries will have genuine cancels if they made it through delivery.

Regarding the "C", to my eye it is still the partially closed "C". The black ink of the cancel is not enough to close it that much, and the bottom curve of the "C" goes up noticeably higher, especially when you compare to the same bottom curve of the right "C". I thought I might have seen a small break in the line underneath the "Q" but decided it was just an anomalous printing freak that just happens to result in a line discontinuity/weakness there. So I made the call for Type I based completely on the nearly closed "C".

There's a thread comparing the genuine vs. forgery (not the postal forgery) on SCF somewhere.

i'm assuming you think all my stamps are forgeries..a bit rediculous..
wouldn't you say..?

i can also assume you are directing the coversation right into a mutual argument which I do not want any involvement..

You're missing the point. Besides, the postal forgery in this case is actually worth more than the genuine used stamp.