¹ Here nothing more can be lost, so this should be a rather short name. My suggestion given here is tentative and not completely sure. For this name see Lüddeckens, Demotisches Namenbuch (1979-2000), 830 – 831. This line x+1 should mention not a further countersigner, but the issuer of the entire receipt. Its lower line pitch is much larger than those between the three last lines containing the countersigners.
² Due to the matter mentioned below, the name in l. 3 must be rather short, the ink remnants at the break indicate to assume a small Pa- with caution here.
³ The short stroke after the spatium in the last line eludes any reading. In my opinion it does not belong to the text and depicts random ink traces only.