The spelling of pr.t-ḫrw kꜣ ꜣpd.w is irregular, as one would expect the vessel and the loaf of bread in the lower right and left corner of the pr.t-ḫrw-logogram (equaling the sign O3), followed by the animal heads, instead of first the ox' head (F1) and bird's head (H1) in the lower left corner, at the place of the vessel. Perhaps the engraver suddenly noticed the lack of space for the still required signs and thus modified the regular writing.
Moreover, kꜣ and ꜣpd.w are the only offerings mentioned in the text that are also depicted in the image field. kꜣ comprises the cut of meat and the ḫpš-foreleg, and the four depicted roasted ducks can be classified as ꜣpd.w. It is interesting to note that none of the other offerings mentioned in the inscription are depicted in the image field. Nevertheless – or maybe because of this – a composition of intertwined text and image is evident. On the one hand, by not doubling the offerings, apart from kꜣ and ꜣpd.w, there was more space available. On the other hand, Weber, in: Deicher/Maroko, Die Liste, 231, recognized an intended dualism between the offering tables and the accompanying offering lists that do not correlate: Offering table and list function as a unity, but can also "in ihren einzelnen Aspekten […] unabhängig voneinander funktionieren". Thus, the decorative programme underlay the principle of ritual efficacy which had to guarantee the continuity of providing for the dead. Image and text
constitute, therefore, two supporting pillars, which, however, also functioned as isolated units.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

The personal name of the donor is fully preserved on the right side and can thus be reconstructed here. It is interesting to note that the name is spelled in two different ways: On the left with double reed leaf and on the right without it.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

The arm D37 is oriented from left to right, in contrast to the right-to-left-orientation of this line. This kind of "reversal" is done on purpose, in order "to direct the offerings towards the recipient" (Fischer, Orientation of Hieroglyphs I, §25, 63-70) – the recipient in this case is Meri-Ra, whose name is given at the end of the formula. The reversal of the arms is particularly well-attested after an evocation of Osiris. A reason for this might be the evoking of his manifestation as Osiris-Khontamenti, into which Meri-Ra is transformed – or rather with whom he merges – after his death.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

Compared to the spelling of this title in the formula on the right side, the sign in front of the nṯr-sign is not a garbled t of an abbreviated jt-nṯr, but the stroke Z1. Thus, the title was incomplete here.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

Due to the severe damage in this area, all of the text passage is lost. Based on several comparable inscriptions of the New Kingdom, the words jrp: "wine" and jrṯ.t: "milk" can be restored here. This concludes the list of offerings in this chapter.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

This part shows two emendations, which appear like bad abrasions at first glance:
Firstly, there are traces of the ripple of water (N35) between the plural strokes (Z2) of the preceding word and the neck of the snake (I10), the first hieroglyph of the word ḏfꜣ. It seems as if this n-hieroglyph – which does not belong to the subsequent word – was erroneously carved and immediately erased afterwards.
The second emendation concerns the horned viper (I9): Traces of this sign, such as its clearly pronounced horns, indicate that the viper was first carved directly below the horizontal part of the snake's (I10) body, right next to the hanging tail. Later, this hieroglyph was erased and carved again below the tail of the
snake.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

Based on the final part of the text on the right side of the offering table, the reconstruction n kꜣ n(.j) Wsjr seems plausible. The seated god (A40), which serves as determinative of Wsjr, is almost completely preserved.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze

The m (Aa 15) is here grouped together into one square with the following pr-Rꜥ, whereas it is grouped together with the preceding ꜥ.wj in the corresponding part on the right half of the text.

Commentary author: Klara Dietze