You are a canon-consistency lens for a novel draft. Facts only — no s…

Findings:

1. Fenholt geography — church end. redacted sentence: unpublished prose and at the far end a big old hall with a board over its door." Since travellers arrive from the west (Ranner's Sluice direction), the church at the near end = west end — consistent. The "big old hall with a board" at the far (east) end matches the Charter house (former wool hall) at the east end. Consistent, no conflict.

2. Church tower visibility. redacted sentence: unpublished prose

3. Withy bed / gate order. redacted sentence: unpublished prose Consistent. "Willows coppiced to stools" — geography.md doesn't specify willow management, but this is consistent with "withy bed" (willows grown for withies are routinely coppiced/pollarded to stools) — uncontradicted, uncited, plausible.

4. [Wayfaring — Level 12.] in the street, Day 9. redacted sentence: unpublished prose

5. "That skill last moved when I was still walking between parishes, which stopped about two hundred years ago" (line 19) — matches canon exactly.

6. Peri's inference: "Twelve, and it moved a level in two days... Twelve means it was eleven for two hundred years" (line 21). redacted sentence: unpublished prose This is consistent — Peri's inference matches canon exactly.

7. Declining to open the sheet. Scene 30 lines 23–27: "I haven't opened my sheet in about a hundred years... I know what I can do... The System counts what it counts." Canon (edwin.md ch. redacted sentence: unpublished prose Note: canon's stated reason is terser ("saw no reason to begin"); the scene's elaborated reason is new material, not contradicted by anything on record, but flag as uncontradicted, uncited (the specific reasoning — "if it agreed I'd have learned nothing... argued with a number" — is not attested on any existing page, so treat as new characterization, not an established quote to be reconciled against). Not a fact conflict.

8. redacted sentence: unpublished prose Scene 30 does not have Edwin reading time off status in this scene, and correctly restricts his refusal to "my sheet," never claiming he ignores the System altogether. Consistent — no overclaim.

9. Arrival time: "twenty past six in the evening... three hours older than the plan" (line 7). redacted sentence: unpublished prose Neither of them mentioned it')." 18:20 = twenty past six. Exact match, including the "neither mentioned it" beat.

10. Guess-count arithmetic — problem found. Scene 28 (Day 8) establishes: she reaches forty-one guesses by mid-afternoon (line 65: "Forty-one honest guesses did what three and a half months of asking didn't") — this is the total guess count, not a "right" count, and it's Day 8, not "yesterday" relative to itself. Scene 28 never gives a "right" tally for Day 8 — no figure like "29 right" appears anywhere in scenes 28 or 29.

Scene 30 line 5 states: "Peri reached her fifty guesses by the middle of the afternoon and announced the day's score so far, which was thirty-one right, and added that yesterday's had been twenty-nine, and that two days was not a line yet."

Problems:

• Scene 28 never records a "right" count for Day 8 at all — only the raw guess total (41, not 50, and not "right/wrong" scored). There is no "twenty-nine right" anywhere on the page to cite as "yesterday's." This is an invented figure with nothing behind it — not necessarily wrong, but uncontradicted-uncited only if it doesn't clash with the 41 total; it does clash: if 41 guesses were made on Day 8 and this drill is "fifty a day" (scene 28 line 15: "Fifty a day will do it"), a full day's count would be 50, but Day 8 explicitly capped at 41 by end of use (the box arrived and drill data stops being narrated) — the day's total guesses on Day 8 was at least 41, not necessarily 50. Peri could have made more guesses after the box, off-page, up to 50. So a "yesterday's had been twenty-nine [right]" is not directly contradicted by a hard number, but it is uncontradicted, uncited — no page establishes any "right" tally for Day 8.
• Larger problem: Day 9's own arithmetic. "Reached her fifty guesses by the middle of the afternoon" then "thirty-one right" — 31 right out of 50 by mid-afternoon is internally fine as a fresh figure (uncited but not contradicted). However, note the drill was established (scene 28 line 13) as "fifty a day," so completing 50 by "the middle of the afternoon" while also being delayed for hours by sheep, gates, a windpump keeper, etc. (this scene's causes for the 3-hour overrun) is plausible timing but not contradicted.

So the concrete finding: "yesterday's had been twenty-nine" has no citable Day-8 fact behind it — flag as uncontradicted, uncited, not a hard arithmetic break, since scene 28/29 never record a marked "right" score for Day 8, so no number can be checked against it. Minimal fix if a citable anchor is wanted: replace "twenty-nine" with any unstated number, or better, have Peri reference the Day 8 guess-count fact that is on the page (41 total guesses, not a right-count) rather than implying a scored total exists for Day 8.

11. Mattie's foreknowledge — real problem. Scene 30 line 45: "on the strength of a letter's answer that had only said I will come." But canon (mattie-ordish.md, timeline.md) establishes Mattie's letter was answered as part of Edwin's Day 5 correspondence, and per SCENES.md's own act-two binding notes and scene 21's "before the Charter" beat (Day 21 in the timeline — "Edwin tells Mattie... redacted sentence: unpublished prose the Fenholt farmer)"). Edwin's response letters (per SCENES.md scene 14 "three letters" and system's list) — the identified reply letters were established as going "to Wystow and Lord Marsh" per the check instructions given (this is stated by the checker as an established scene fact, presumably from scene 14/15's drafted content, not visible to me directly but asserted in the task). Given that framing: if Edwin's only two answered letters (per scene 21's on-page facts) went to Wystow and Lord Marsh, there is no on-page reply to Mattie at all before departure — yet scene 30 asserts Mattie is baking on the strength of "a letter's answer that had only said I will come," implying Edwin wrote back to her specifically.

This is a real gap: nothing in the read files documents Edwin sending Mattie a direct short reply "I will come." Canon does establish (mattie-ordish.md) that Mattie's own letter said "I will come" is not attested anywhere — her letter is quoted elsewhere as ending "The rings are getting bigger. I measured with the chain," with no reply text established. And geography/timeline show Fenholt knows to expect them ("expected on the fourth" pattern is used elsewhere for Marsh, not Fenholt) — nothing establishes Mattie was told a specific arrival day, yet she's baking "since noon" as if forewarned of today specifically.

Flag: no established letter from Edwin to Mattie exists in the cited scene facts (letters went to Wystow and Lord Marsh only). "A letter's answer that had only said I will come" implies a reply to Mattie that is not on the page and contradicts the given two-letter fact.

Minimal fix preserving the reason (Mattie baking, expectant, without inventing an unwritten reply letter): change the causal reason from "a letter's answer" to something consistent with the established letters — e.g., attribute her readiness to local word-of-mouth / the road's own gossip network (already dramatized in this very scene: villagers reacting to "we've come about her top field" shows Fenholt already knows something is coming), rather than a personal letter of reply. E.g.: "on the strength of a message passed hand to hand up from the Sluice that the mage was on the road" or simply "on the strength of knowing, the way the whole street had known, that the mage was coming." This preserves the reason (why she's baking) without asserting an unwritten letter.

12. Forbidden names / act-two binding list: no violation found — no lifespan guarantee, no "one spell one shed" repeat, no engine move logged near a mouth/site/letter, destiny not discussed, redacted's people not mentioned. Scene 30 is not listed in the act-two "moved for redraft" list (32–33 were flagged for redraft in the commit log, not 30) — consistent with being treated as a fresh draft under check now.

13. redacted sentence: unpublished prose

Summary of actionable items: (a) the "yesterday's had been twenty-nine [right]" guess figure is uncited/unverifiable against scene 28's numbers — flag; (b) the "letter's answer that had only said I will come" is a fact conflict with the established letters (Wystow, Lord Marsh only) and needs a minimal reason-preserving fix as above.