Only the foot of a letter is visible before minus; this is compatible with r and we are now confident of Fi]rminus, which we suggested in the ed. pr., in view of the name on the back of (c). The evidence of the new tablets makes it likely that there was a gentilicium preceding, which means that there will be a few letters lost at the left of lines 3ff.
We are now confident of contractu (what we took as a possible i is in fact part of e in the line below). For the phrase in legal texts see TLL IV 753.39.
At the start a restoration of iuro me or affirmo me would suit the sense we envisage. At the end perhaps es[t.
The broken letter at the right will not allow i but suits o; therefore, presumably, some case of pudor. Perhaps a reference to the pudor of a hominis modesti, cf. OLD, s.v. pudor, 2c.
There are three scraps with traces of writing which cannot be placed (see note in the ed. pr., line 9).
None of the letters survives complete but the reading fits the traces very well.
Probably restore u]sque ad me.
Perhaps ua]le fra[ter, which is compatible with a position at the bottom of the right-hand side of a leaf suggested by the content of the back, but note that this is written by the same hand as the rest of the text.
This must be the name of the sender of the letter and, together with the hand, suggests the connection of these two fragments with the main portion of the letter.