When Neville was about seven, a strange Englishwoman living on a pension in a wild windswept part of Barbados told him he would leave the island and not return save to visit, would be the first of his family to marry, would marry more than once and have two children, would talk to unnumbered people and be selling something, and that centuries after he was gone his name would be linked with two others who did similar work.
Date (happened)
c. 1912
stated · preferred
Told
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 Superseded here: delta 0: 1968-05-10 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`).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 ¶41 (But centuries and centuries after you are gone, they will use your name and link it with two others who did similar work.)