1a         

L is cut by R in line 2, so these letters were interlineated before line 2 was written. The peculiar letter-sequence (which is fairly clear) must have completed the last word of line 1; the only possibility seems to be cultellus (‘knife’), unless it is a personal name.

3         

Surface-cracks and corrosion products have almost destroyed the first two(?) letters, but the possible traces suggest O (perhaps Q or D) and A. After them ESVNT is clear enough, suggesting sunt or a compound verb, e.g. praesunt or desunt. Then comes sus[pe]cti sunt inter [] or inter[...], depending on whether inter is a preposition or part of a verb (e.g. intercepisse). This is presumably a reference to suspected thieves.

3         

This line apparently contains a garbled form of the rem deus inveniat formula (the god is to find the lost property or the guilty person; see Tab. Sulis, p.64 s.v. inveniat). If [d]eus is to be read, therefore, it must have been qualified by [.]llus unless this is a diminutive termination from line 2. The only restoration formally possible, [u]llus, is inappropriate to deus (‘any god’), so perhaps the scribe actually wrote [i]llus for ille. The space available to the left of LL suits I, not V. Since *illus is not a known ‘Vulgar’ form, it would be an error prompted by the ending of deus.

4         

lami[l]la una. The scribe wrote I, not E. Since ‘one lamilla’ is coupled with ‘four rings’, it must be something valuable; presumably a mis-spelling of lamella in the sense of ‘(silver) plate’. Lamina and its diminutive lamella are used in the sense of ‘silver’, i.e. ‘money’ but not explicitly ‘coin’, just as Roman silver plate often carries a note of weight to indicate its value as bullion.

et anulli quator. The Vulgarism anellus<anulus is found, but anulli would seem to be another mis-spelling; the scribe evidently had trouble with his diminutives. Another Uley tablet (Uley-72) writes Classical quattuor, but quattor and quator are a frequent Vulgarism, whence Italian ‘quattro’, Portuguese ‘quatro’ (etc.).

This ‘one piece of (silver) plate and four rings’, bullion in a convenient form, must be the property stolen. The nominative case is unusual but, as noted above, it also occurs in Uley-3, anulus aureus. The governing verb is lost in both, but it may have been pereo used as the passive of perdo, ‘lost’ in the sense of ‘stolen’; thus per[i]erunt is used of stolen gloves in Uley-80, where see the note on p. 441. For other curse tablets prompted by the theft of rings see RIB 306 Lydney-1, anilum; Tab. Sulis 97, anilum argenteum, and perhaps 59, ANVLIS.