Neville's mother, who bore twelve children and died of cancer at 61 in Barbados looking 90, appeared to him in New York City on the day of her death as a blonde girl of 20 brushing her hair under an arbour of flowers; he wrote at once to his sister Daphne, whose censored-era letter arrived eight to ten days later and, allowing for the hour's time difference, confirmed the exact moment of her passing.
Date (happened)
c. November 1941
unresolved
c. November 1941
stated · preferred
-
1941
stated
Reasoning
Passage 528442 synchronizes the vision with the day of death, and the immediately following passage 528443 explicitly supplies the death year as 1941. This is a direct textual year claim rather than a title or carrier-date inference.
before 1968
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [543127] belong to telling lecture nids [1755]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1968 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1968 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 17 July 1968
bound
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1968 to before 1968-07-17.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1755 (certain delivery 1968-07-17); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1968`, an envelope over delivery YEARS computed without reading text. Its premise is that the fact is true by the time it is told; on that same premise the DAY of the telling is a strictly better upper bound. Nothing is re-decided — the bound is stated to the precision the evidence always supported. The delivery claim for 1968-07-17 on nid 1755 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one.
before 1967
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [536882] belong to telling lecture nids [1314]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1967 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1967 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 15 December 1967
bound
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1967 to before 1967-12-15.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1314 (certain delivery 1967-12-15); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1967`, an envelope over delivery YEARS computed without reading text. Its premise is that the fact is true by the time it is told; on that same premise the DAY of the telling is a strictly better upper bound. Nothing is re-decided — the bound is stated to the precision the evidence always supported. The delivery claim for 1967-12-15 on nid 1314 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one.
c. 1941
estimated · probable
Why
M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 017)
Reasoning
Passage 536882: 'My mother, the day she died, the very hour she died, appeared to me' as a young woman. The chronology dates her final illness to 1941 (8908 letter 1941-08, 19213 voyage, 8877 three weeks with her 1941-10..11) and carries the same appearance as 15033 (1941).
Told / reported
1970
estimated
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1036 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1036 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1970-??-?? at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1957-??-?? refuted; 1968-5-10 refuted; 1970-??-?? certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1968-05-10 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
-
-
-
10 May 1968
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1036, 1968-5-10) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1970-?-?. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- The Divine Body ¶29 (The day she died I was seated in my place In New York City, and she appeared before me, a girl of 20.)
- The Divine Body ¶30 (Mother died in '41; I was born in 1905.)
- The Divine Body ¶31 (Allowing for one hour's difference, that was the moment in time when my Mother passed.)
- Immortal Man ¶40 (So I came back. I was sitting in my living room. The mother comes before me, and she was a girl, beautiful blonde, as she was, as a young woman — blonde, blue eyes. And mother is before me sitting under an arbor. She was passionately fond of flowers and …)
- The Pattern Man ¶64 (As I did, Mother appeared before me − this blonde, blue-eyed beauty of about twenty years of age, brushing her hair, under an arbor of beautiful flowers.)
- Imparting and Implanting the Word ¶48 (My mother, the day she died, the very hour she died, appeared to me and she’s this beautiful woman twenty years old, unusually pretty, blonde, blue-eyed, brushing her hair…just altogether lovely.)