In vision Neville came upon a family of four dining in what he felt was New England two hundred years earlier, arrested an activity within himself, and everything in the scene froze until he released it, showing him that the whole world depends on an activity within him.
Date (happened)
c. 1758
stated · preferred
between 1905 and 1971
bound · probable
Why
Append-only correction of content-date contamination; the separate historical scene remains event 5981.
Reasoning
The phrase 'about two hundred years ago' modifies the New England dining scene, not the date when Neville experienced the vision. Because this entity records Neville's experience, its defensible bounds are his lifetime beginning in 1905 and the 1971 telling. The carrier supports only a probable year, so the replacement envelope is probable and year-only.
before 1967
bound · probable
Reasoning
Neville narrates his own completed movement in spirit in the past tense, before this 1967 telling.
Told / reported
1971
estimated · probable
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 1041 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 1041 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1971-??-?? at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1958-1-27 refuted; 1971-??-?? probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1958-01-27 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1958-01-27 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). 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.
27 November 1967
estimated · probable
Reasoning
Neville recounts the vision in this lecture, whose delivery date of 1967-11-27 rests on a single catalog entry marked legacy_unreviewed with no independent chrome corroboration in this packet, so held at probable rather than the catalog's own stated certain.
27 January 1958
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1041, 1958-1-27) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-?-?. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
27 January 1958
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1041 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1041 delivery claims: 1958-1-27 refuted; 1971-??-?? probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1041, 1958-1-27) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-?-?. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Who Is the Son of Man ¶2 (I arrested an activity within me, and everything stood sill. A bird was flying and it flew not. The waiter was coming in with the next course, and she walked not.)