Although the fifth word is damaged, comparison of the form of the terminal letter and the “me” in line six indicates that this is “me.” Likewise, the ascender with hook of the initial letter of the sixth word, when compared with the manuscript witnesses and line six indicates “so.” ↩

The initial portion of the line is badly damaged, but enough unique features remain of the individual letter forms to determine all the letters of the initial word except for “o” when compared against the other lines in the panel. Likewise, enough of the first and third letters of the second word exist to clarify that it is “myn.” The manuscript witnesses suggest that the third word is “enemies,” but only the final two letters can be determined definitively. ↩

Like the line above it, this line is badly damaged – so much so that the attempted repair has shifted the initial portion of the line down significantly. Nevertheless, the bottom portion of the last two letters of the first word are likely “nd,” making the word “and” based on the manuscript witnesses. The third word can be definitvely determined to be “that” based on the descender of the second letter, the otiose marks the scribe always places on “t” when at the initial or terminal portions of a word, and the minims indicating the bottom of the “a.” The fourth word can be determined by the tittle above the break. The fifth can be determined by the otiose mark for initial “t,” and the “o” following can be determined from context. The “me” at the end of the sixth word can be determined from the existing minims and the otiose mark the scribe places at the end of e. The second letter of the word can also be determined to be e, and the remains around it makes the letters on either side likely to be “r” and “f” based on the manuscript witnesses. The seventh cannot be determined definitively by the evidence as the remnants fit neither “you” nor “the” sufficently, but the eighth can based on the last four letters of the word, the initial letter “g” based on context, and the remnants of the top of the letter. ↩

Like the two lines above it, this line is badly damaged. The third word, however, still has its ascenders and enough of the minims to determine it is “alambe.” Likewise, the bottom of the initial letter, the high ascender with cross-stroke, the bow of the “e,” the damaged “r” form and the minim of the “i”, and the tittle of that “i” indicate that the fourth word is “offerid.” Unfortunately, the only thing that remains of the fifth word is the bottom of the terminal letter, which appears to be “o” but may be a badly damaged “n.” The slightly remnant of the minim of the initial letter could likewise be part of either “i” or “t.” Thus, the word is too ambiguous to determine definitively. ↩