Lines 4-6: Line 4 appears to introduce a consideration of specific perquisites from the sacrificial animals, which are continued in the two following lines. The traces τὸ δὲ ΚΟ could be interpreted in two ways. The best explanation, given the skins which probably follow, is τὸ δὲ κό[ιδιον] suggested by Halbherr and followed by Sokolowski (but without the expected iota adscriptum; the idea is considered by Guarducci but not adopted in her text). An alternative would be τὸ δὲ κό[λον], referring to a limb of the animal(s). In line 6, general agreement following Halbherr holds that ἡ βοΐα ought properly to designate an ox-hide. If κό[ιδιον] is also right in line 4, this leads us to consider the traces in line 5 as portions of lambs, probably skins. The traces there are problematic, giving ΑΜΝΑΤΑΤΑΝ. Guarducci plausibly suggests a dittography, but we could also suppose that the cutter has made an anticipatory mistake. We suggest to correct this to ἀμμνα⌈ῖ⌉α, meaning lambskins (cf. LSJ s.v. ἀμνεῖος). At the end of line 6, Halbherr, followed by Sokolowski, suggests ὀ ἰαρε[ὺς λαβέτο]; this gives the right sense, but other forms of the verb λαμβάνειν are equally possible, and more damning is the fact that no verbs are attested in the inscription.

τὰς δὲ κεφαλὰς καὶ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοὶ ἐχόντων, τὰ δὲ
45κώιδια πωλούντων ἐν τῶι θιάσωι καὶ τῆι δευτέραι
λόγον ἀπο ⌈δ⌉ Λ όντωσαν πρὸ τοῦ δείπνου ἀνα-