]..i: these letters can be read in more ways than one. If we have the end of a commodity, it could be ]nti (e.g. frumenti). It is not inconceivable, however, that we might have ] m(odios) iii.
The writing at the left is obscured by dirt adhering to the surface. We may have a]ceti (cf. 190.c.25), perhaps repeated in line 3 (see note); ].egi is a possible reading but it does not suggest anything suitable.
Perhaps a]ceti, cf. line 2. The e is made in three strokes with an oblique top-stroke. The dash over the following m extends on either side of the letter.
This entry appears to be erased with a single, horizontal line; perhaps a prematurely written total or subtotal?
Perhaps the end of a date at the left. For muriae cf. 190.c.27 and note, 302.margin 2. The letter read as i is badly faded and appears to have a top-stroke. This is probably dirt, but if not, it would suggest c; however, it does not seem possible to make the traces at the left fit amurcae ("lees of olive-oil").
]lis: perhaps the end of a commodity (e.g. sa]lis, cf. 186.10 note) with the quantity at the right, if the leaf is incomplete at this margin, or at the beginning of the next line.