Jacques Bongars at Strasbourg, 26 January 1597: the names in cipher

TASK: take a partial decipherment further: Jacques Bongars at Strasbourg, 26 January 1597: the names in cipher
This page: https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/further/bongars1597.html

You are helping a public research project finish reading historical cipher letters. This one is read in part:
the key works, but some pieces are still open. Your job is to close one or more of the open gaps below.

THE READING
  Write-up:   https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/bongars1597.html (read it first: how the text was read, the key, the reading)
  Date:       1597
  Outcome:    external key matched · partial
  Read now:   44.0% of the deciphered cipher tokens give sense (pieces below may be untouched)
  Files:      https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/tree/main/targets/bongars1597 (NOTES.md, key, transcription, reading, scripts)

OPEN GAPS (from NOTES.md, "## Remaining gaps")
  1. [illegible: needs a new source] G1 (f. 360r line 1: a figure under a tilde, then digits with marks) - blocker: illegible; the marks that tell the letters apart cannot be read on the 658 x 895 px catalogue image, the only one online
  2. [illegible: needs a new source] G2 (f. 360r line 2, double cross with dots) and G5 (f. 360r line 16, 4 with a bar) - blocker: illegible; each occurs once and at this image size is not told apart from two or three table signs (candidates: Comte Palatin; Madame soeur du Roy)
  3. [illegible: needs a new source] G3 (les Estats?) and G6 (Queen Elizabeth?), from context only - blocker: illegible; the leaf signs do not match the table's signs for those names at this image size, a larger scan from the Burgerbibliothek would settle them
  4. [illegible: needs a new source] three doubtful words of the clear text (deputé, ma/sa, Firx) and the verb "l'apprecie" - blocker: illegible; same image
  5. [needs-physical-access: needs a new source] R. Kohlndorfer-Fries, Diplomatie und Gelehrtenrepublik (2009), not checked for a calendar entry of these two letters - blocker: needs-physical-access; a printed book with no online text
  6. [no-key-material: needs a new source] the common-word signs of fr. 7131 f. 548 (about 200) are not transcribed - blocker: no-key-material; the two letters use none of them, so nothing here tests them

ALREADY TRIED (from NOTES.md, "## Escalation")
  [x] siblings: Hagen 1875 lists the neighbours 447-454 of Cod. B 149 (A); the catalogue flags only 451 and 452 as having coded names (lead vetting, 9 Nov 2026); no other leaf opened
  [x] clear-pages: none; a letter-book copy, no decipherment on or with the leaves (both images read again)
  [x] known-keys: BnF fr. 7131 f. 255v (no. 23), f. 262r (no. 28) and f. 548r-v (no. 29) opened on Gallica; f. 548 fits (4 groups), the other two ruled out
  [x] print: Hagen 1875 (no edition named for 451-452); Anquez 1887 and web by the contributor: nothing
  [x] retry: all nine groups compared again with f. 548 after the match; G1, G2, G5 stay open, G3 and G6 stay context-only

STEPS
0. Set up. If you can run a shell, fork and clone the repository and work inside it:
     git clone https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver.git
   Then read, in this order: CONTRIBUTING.md (how a contribution is sent and credited); README.md, sections
   "Repository layout" and "Conventions" (how readings are measured and named); targets/bongars1597/NOTES.md in full, and the
   key, transcription and reading files it names; lang/README.md (shared language models).
   Work in targets/bongars1597/. Add your findings to NOTES.md under a dated heading without rewriting what is there, and
   update the "## Remaining gaps" line of every gap you close. Keep WORKLOG.md there: one dated line per step
   (hypothesis, value tried, solver run, crib, control), failures included. Do not edit docs/ (the site is generated).
   If you cannot run a shell, fetch the files from the links above and keep your work in files you send with the issue.
1. Pick a gap. Start with the ones marked "doable now" (open-codes, not-attempted, left-open): the images and the key
   are online, so they need only work. A gap marked "needs a new source" (no-key-material, too-short, illegible,
   needs-physical-access) can be closed only by something new: a key
   or a deciphered sibling found elsewhere, a better image, a printed edition or calendar, a photograph from the archive.
   For those, search for that material first, and say where you looked even when you find nothing.
2. Start from the existing key and transcription in the folder. Do not rebuild the key from scratch, and do not
   re-read parts that are already read unless you find an error in them.
3. For a code group or sign value: list every place the group occurs, show how each reads with the value you propose,
   and say what still does not fit. For a passage: re-read it at the image and give the folio and line. For a missing
   letter or leaf: say where it is held and how it can be reached.
4. Measure again. Apply the key to the whole text, write the reading file, and count the share of cipher tokens that
   give sense (not an estimate). The reading is "complete" only when (1) at least 95% of its cipher tokens give sense;
   (2) no gap is left untried; (3) every letter in it is covered; (4) what stays open is scattered code groups or names,
   or pieces blocked from outside. Otherwise it stays "partial": say which gaps are still open and why.
5. Be honest. Mark every uncertain word with [?], leave unread groups as their numbers or signs, and never fill a gap
   with a plausible guess. A gap retried and still open, with what was ruled out, is worth reporting.

REPORT BACK
With a clone: open a pull request with your changes to targets/bongars1597/. Say in the description which gaps you worked on,
  the share read before and after, and how you want to be credited (name, initials or handle, and a link).
Without one: open an issue: https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/issues/new?template=further-reading.yml&title=Further+reading%3A+bongars1597&page=bongars1597.html
  Give the write-up, the gap you worked on (its line in Remaining gaps, or the code group, folio and line), what you
  propose, the evidence (every occurrence, the images or sources), the share read before and after, your step log,
  and the tools and AI model you used.
If you cannot open issues or pull requests, write this report for your human to send. Credit goes to the person who sends it.