Help Please With Sc/Type/Plate

Help please. Is this a Sc# 7 on cover? Could someone identify the Type & Plate?
The stamp:


Is this a shifted transfer --> at back of head, along the hairline, or is it just optics caused by inking?

The stamp is tied to this cover by a black LEBANON, Penn MAY 20 (1855) cds:


Thanks in advance for your help and assistance.
Hal

Ty IV, #9 Pos 6L1L.

Regarding whether there is evidence of re-entry here, the answer is yes. The top right shows some such evidence, and possibly other areas as well.

Plate 1-Late is a re-entered plate. In mid 1852, the original plate (1) was re-entered and all but one position was recut. As such, there are many double transfers and remnants of original entries.

Here is Ashbrook's drawing of this position.
It was recut twice at bottom only.

TX, may I ask what you are using to see the detail? I enlarge the image and it gets too fuzzy to see the details.

I agree txstamp.

TX...THANK YOU!! very much to all for your help, ID of Sc#9 (vs #7) and understanding of what I am seeing on the plating of this stamp and the re-entry.

Stay safe, everyone!
Hal

Stallzer, one can see from the original post that 1) the stamp is recut twice at bottom hence #9, Plate 1 Late; 2) it is Relief T, hence top row. The plating marks in the reverse C-shaped ornament are also visible in the original photo, identifying the position as 6L.

stallzer - you are right that the image might be difficult to plate from, however, this one is actually quite easy.

First - its a modified T relief, which means top row Plate 1,2,3.

Second - its recut at bottom, so its Plate 1-Late.

Third - The modified T relief on 1L is 1-10L, and 1R, 2R. 1R and 2R are easy to eliminate so its clearly top row left pane 1L.

Fourth - The big dot between ornament F and G is a dead giveaway. That narrows it to position 3L1L or 6L1L. The orientation of the dot points only at 6L1L. Also, I can see some of the doubling at top right by ornament Z.

Thanks for all the additional info and insights!!

Thanks TX and Dudley for the explanation. The lines did not look thick enough to me to be recut so I was actually leaning towards a type II. Shows how much I have to learn on this issue.

Classics are not my area - that is why I am never afraid to ask & I love to learn something new daily.