Vale. [: the last trace is compatible with n. Valen[tinus could be read, a name which occurs in 255.i.3, but since this is a letter sent to Flavius Cerialis it is not probable that this is the same man.
Frue.[: the name Fruendus is reasonably well-attested in Gallia Belgica (see NPEL) and it is a good possibility here. We may have the name Frumentius in 160 (see Tab.Vindol.I, p.83, A.10 note) but there does not seem to be room for m before e here.
If the initial letter is C we may have Cresc[ens or Cresc[entius; if P, probably Prese[ns or Prese[ntius, (ae>e).
The beginning of the line is smudged but there may well be a letter before i and, if so, it is most probably V. Viddic occurs in CIL 13.10010.2038, cf. perhaps Viducus, attested as a cognomen in Gallia Belgica and cf. RIB II 2463.59; if there is not a letter before i, we wonder whether we might have the African name Iddibal which is used as both a gentilicium (P. Iddibalius Victorinus, CIL 8.859) and a cognomen (IRT 273, 300, 324). We note Imilco is attested as the name of a freedman in RIB I 193 (Colchester) and there is no guarantee that all the names in the present account must be those of military personnel (see note to line i.10). The reading Vibbi[ is less attractive but might suggest Vibbianus (for Vibianus).
sud · : the reading appears to be very probable and sum(ma) is not possible. We can only suggest an abbreviation for sud(arium/-aria), cf. 184.i.10 etc.
The reading is very difficult, especially at the beginning where there may be some smudging or correction and at the end where there is abrasion. The second and third letters could well be rc and n could be r..The almost capital form of the a between g and n is noteworthy. If the first letter were t, which is not impossible, we might have a name beginning Taga- (cf. 181.14, 184.i.3).
In these lines we appear to have amounts at the right but no clear denarius-symbol, in contrast to line i.7. The amount in line 9 might belong with the name (?) in line 8. Perhaps the sums were added later (by a second hand?).
The reading of Martias is secure and this indicates that we must have a date. Although the reading of Idus is difficult we can see no other possibility.
Crispa: the reading of the last two letters is difficult but the amount of writing and the spacing suggests that we have two names or words and it is impossible to read a termination in -us. For Pol(l)io see LC 164, RIB II 2491.114. The implication of reading the name of a woman in an account is not impossible to accept, cf. 181.14-5 note. We suppose that the simple genitive could be taken to mean "daughter of", "wife of" (cf. 291.back 15-7 note), whether legally recognised or not, or "slave of" (cf. 301.back).
For the abbreviation uet for uet(eranus) see e.g. RIB I 517, 887, CEL 217.1 (= ChLA XI 477). This seems more probable than uet(erinarius), cf. 310.i.11, 181.7. If this is correct, it is the only explicit evidence in the tablets for the presence of a veteran, but it is hardly surprising to find one in the vicinity of an important fort (cf. the diploma, RMD II 97).
Masuetus: the reading of initial M is not easy but we think it likely to be correct. For the form see Marichal (1988), index s.v. The name Mansuetus probably appears in 188.12. It is a common servile name, suggesting that what follows may be the name of the owner.
We suppose that this is a name and that we should understand Hue- as Ve-, see 184.ii.27 note.