a..: it is not possible to read the first letter as r (e.g. rat[io); the second might be n and we certainly cannot read a Gau[uone (cf. 192.1, 207.1). Furthermore, the line is indented, which suggests that it is not the beginning of the text. In that case we may have a word for something ordered or purchased, if our hypothesis about the nature of the text is correct. Although we may have the top edge of this leaf, there is no reason why it should not be the lower half of a diptych, with the account beginning on the preceding half.
The cognomina Senecio and Senecianus are well-attested (see NPEL); the trace before the break is compatible with c. Names beginning with Sen- are particularly common in Gaul and Britain (cf. Inv.1091.a, VRR II, 58).
We take these letters to be the beginning of words for items ordered or purchased by Senec-, but there are clearly many possible restorations. An alternative for line 4 is m[.
There is a mark at the edge of the leaf but it is impossible to be sure whether or not it is ink; if so, it might be part of the cross-bar of e. Ande- is a common prefix (AS I 139) and Andecarus occurs in 182.ii.17, but the reading Andle- here is certain. AS I 148 cites Andlis as the name of a Spanish female deity. Perhaps a more promising parallel is Adled[us in CIL 13.5278 (Germania Superior); in order to read Andle[dus, however, we would certainly have to ignore the mark at the edge of the leaf.
Cf. 182.back 5, Sautenus. Sautenius occurs once as a nomen in Gallia Belgica (AE 1968.335) and the remains of the last surviving letter are compatible with n. Note also Sau... (CIL 13.676) and the cognomen Sautus in the Trier region (CIL 13.4123).
There is a possible trace of a letter at the edge of the leaf and the spacing suggests that there ought to be a line of writing here.
equ.: the last surviving trace is compatible with e or i or a but not with u; therefore we cannot read equu[m but the entry is probably something to do with horses (cf. 182.ii.12).
The writer appears to have written brio and inserted gi with a ligature above the line. For the name Brigio, see the note on Brigionus in 250.i.3. The traces following are difficult to read (the second might be m) but it does not look as if Brigionus was written here. Nevertheless, it seems possible that the two references are to the same man, with the name given a Latin termination in the more formal context of a letter of recommendation.
et m.: the last surviving letter clearly seems to be r and it is possible that a vowel has simply been omitted in error (e.g. m<u>r[ia cf. 190.c.27); otherwise we might have a conjoint ur as in 190.c.27, in which case the reading here would be aur[. If we have correctly identified the nature of this text, we should have two items or commodities, linked by et, with the first directly following the name in line 10.
The names Mansuetus and Mansuetarius are very common. The first may occur in the form Masuetus in 187.ii.2.