Two Variants Of Sc#9 Peru 1860-61

I would like to show you these two models of Peru from 1860/61 that in principle correspond to the models SC#9 and SC#9A. The SC#9 as a curiosity is a variant that appears in the Bustamente peruvian catalog as #6n "white background in the upper left corner of the llama field". Now the second stamp SC#9A is more complex because the zigzag in the upper right corner can be seen broken. Is this what Scot classifies as ZigZAg broken in the corners? I would also appreciate if someone is able to decipher its cancellation...

The wreath in the top stamp is not well centered. Also, the location of the tree is different between the stamps. One of these may be original, while the other is a forgery. I'm not an expert in this area, but perhaps others will chime in with their opinions.

The cancel on the 9A looks like LUXEMBOURG, which makes little sense as any legitimate use (Luxembourg not likely being a big receiver of paquebot mail).

Maybe someone can use that to recognize something else that does make sense?

It looks like the month in the cancel is abbreviated SEPT, which feels more French influenced than Spanish influenced? I haven't pulled out any examples to compare.

I think they are both originals, SC#9 is retouched plate 4 and SC#9A would be retouched plate 3 (with the obvious wear that marks the variants of this issue).
Yes, It seems to say "LUXEMBOURG", on the other hand "SEPT" I don't know in French but in Spanish it is a common abbreviation.

I know nothing about classic Peru, but the first thing that struck me was the inner ring of pearls.
The first stamp having 97 pearls, more or less, and
The second having 71.
This is not a minor "retouch" and would be sending me to the fakes/forgeries literature.

Very interesting what John Becker comments. That is a very good point.
Have you verified the measurements of the print?

1- March 1858 : 21 x 20,5 mm.
2- Nov. 1858: 22 x 22 mm.
3- Sept. 1859: 21 x 21 mm.

Also, on your second stamp "porte franco" it's off-center with respect to the frame.

I have extracted this from the Bustamante Peruvian Stamp Catalogue:
"Of this third issue, several reprints were made that motivate interesting varieties.
Of the blue money, up to 5 have been correctly studied, having made 3 of them with the original plate and the following ones retouching it.
In the first impressions, the margins between stamp and stamp are very narrow, barely 1/2 to 1/ 1/2 mm. In the retouched reprints the stamps are separated from each other by a margin of 2 to 2 2 1/2 mm. In very rare occasions these margins are larger.
In the first impressions, the letters PORTE FRANCO are all the same size and the quarter of the shield that contains the horn of plenty has 36 lines and the zigzag is not interrupted at the angles. The third reprint, maintaining the same characteristics of the two previous ones, also presents the background of the horn of plenty or the words of the frame, totally or partially on a plain white background; in this third impression the zigzag lines appear interrupted at the corners. All these varieties can be found combined, and they are the result of the wear of the plate.
The main characteristic of the fourth retouch is that the fourth line that passed through EOS of the word CORREOS on the right has been erased (n6k) and gives the impression that a white stripe passed behind the letters. The words PORTE FRANCO are all at the same height and this detail differentiates it from the fifth retouch in which the letter O of PORTE and CO of FRANCO vary in size and are larger than the other letters.
In these 2 retouches, the background of the field of the cornucopia has been re-engraved and represents 33 vertical lines instead of the 36 that the original stone has. The last touch is the most abundant of all the "little coins" of this issue."
In addition, the only three truly fake copies that I have been able to see are here http://www.peru-philatelic-study-ci...015-7-18.pdf and none of them match my copy because the shape of their shields is very rough in my opinion.

I don't see anything in your list about the placement of the tree, the location of the upper wreath, or the significant change in the number of pearls. Did I miss that?

For now, this is all the information I could find...
Without a doubt, the most significant detail is the pearls, because I have not been able to find anything similar, neither original nor counterfeit... I have also not been able to find the famous cornucopia variants with a white background or interrupted zigzag...

I just spent an hour looking through databases, auction lots and dealer listings at these stamps. I viewed about 27 examples including large multiples and I can find none with the poor engraving quality of your stamps. The one that John pointed out with the odd number of pearls is absolutely a fake. The other one has about zero chance of being genuine based upon what I have seen.

"Album Weeds - How to detect forged stamps" describes the original as having 96 pearls while the forgery has 72. So your first stamp is the only one with a chance of being original. It also describes 15 horizontal shading lines around the llama.

I really appreciate everyone's hours of searching and help, thank you very much!!
Regarding the first stamp, in my opinion, it may not be a quality print but I have no doubts about its originality.. you can see a comparison of the angle grids with those of the sample stamp on the web http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.co...sofPeru.html… or https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...IIb_Yv6c.jpg or the scan posted by jorgesurcl..
The second stamp has many red flags without a doubt…

The second stamp is a fake, finally. This one is number 15 in my album of fakes. Thanks to the forum my fake album is growing a lot and faster than I would like ...

As to your first stamp, could you show me one genuine example where the zig-zag lines are so incomplete.

Like this?