diff --git a/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0012-same-rival-success-six-readings.md b/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0012-same-rival-success-six-readings.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e25315a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0012-same-rival-success-six-readings.md
@@ -0,0 +1,309 @@
+# CORPUS-0012
+## Same Rival Success, Six Readings
+### Status: Training Corpus Seed
+### Layer: Layer_3--Actor_Perspective
+### Purpose: Teach that a rival's success can alter prices, access, expectations, reputation, and future arithmetic differently for each actor profile
+### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0012-same-rival-success-six-readings.md
+
+---
+
+## 0. Scenario
+
+A trader in Ostia learns that a rival successfully completed a venture from Ostia to Capua.
+
+The rival bought oil, reached Capua quickly, sold at a good price, and returned with improved reputation.
+
+The news is uncomfortable.
+
+It is also useful.
+
+All six actors hear the same report.
+
+They do not interpret the rival's success the same way.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Shared Rival Success Facts
+
+| Fact | Value |
+|---|---|
+| Rival route | Ostia -> Capua |
+| Good | oil |
+| Rival result | profitable sale reported |
+| Buyer reaction | favorable |
+| Rival reputation | improved |
+| Market proof | demand likely existed |
+| Current opportunity | uncertain |
+| Rival future access | likely improved |
+| Report confidence | moderate, not fully verified |
+
+A rival's success is not merely personal comparison.
+
+It may change the market.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Marcus Atilius Varro — Former Legionary
+
+Varro reads the rival's success through execution.
+
+He asks:
+
+- how did the rival move faster?
+- what route did he use?
+- which driver carried the goods?
+- what time did he depart?
+- were guards or road contacts involved?
+- did discipline, preparation, or luck explain the success?
+
+Varro is less interested in envy than in operational method.
+
+### Varro Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: movement execution worked
+primary question: what did the rival do correctly on the route?
+risk focus: copying result without copying discipline
+first action: identify carrier, departure time, route, and movement conditions
+```
+
+For Varro, the rival's success proves that execution was possible, but not automatically repeatable.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Lucius Fabius Felix — Freedman Trader
+
+Felix reads the rival's success through a closed or closing price window.
+
+He asks:
+
+- did the rival satisfy the best buyer?
+- did the sale prove demand or exhaust it?
+- who now knows the price gap?
+- will Ostia sellers raise prices?
+- will Capua buyers lower offers after being supplied?
+- can a smaller second move still work?
+
+Felix sees danger in arriving after the first profitable actor.
+
+### Felix Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: price window may be closing
+primary question: what opportunity remains after the rival sold?
+risk focus: stale margin, crowded trade, seller repricing
+first action: test whether demand remains or shift to related goods
+```
+
+For Felix, the rival's success is useful only if it reveals what has not yet been exhausted.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Quintus Cornelius Lentulus Minor — Noble Younger Son
+
+Lentulus reads the rival's success through reputation, comparison, and social access.
+
+He asks:
+
+- who praised the rival?
+- what buyer now favors him?
+- did the rival gain a household introduction?
+- does the success make the trader look slow or uninformed?
+- can the rival's new access be matched or bypassed?
+- is imitation beneath his standing?
+
+Lentulus sees the success as a change in social position.
+
+### Lentulus Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: reputation and access shifted
+primary question: whose attention did the rival gain?
+risk focus: loss of comparative standing, closed introduction, public embarrassment
+first action: identify the social channel created by the rival's sale
+```
+
+For Lentulus, the rival may have gained more than coin.
+
+He may have gained position.
+
+---
+
+## 5. Gaius Licinius Crispus — Failed Magistrate
+
+Crispus reads the rival's success through terms, obligation, and enforceable advantage.
+
+He asks:
+
+- was the sale paid in coin or promise?
+- were terms documented?
+- did the rival secure a future supply agreement?
+- did the buyer owe him preference afterward?
+- was the success actually settled or only announced?
+- can the trader challenge the completeness of the report?
+
+Crispus does not accept public success until settlement is understood.
+
+### Crispus Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: terms may create future priority
+primary question: did the rival gain an enforceable buyer relationship?
+risk focus: hidden obligation, exaggerated success, locked future access
+first action: learn whether sale was fully settled or converted into future claim
+```
+
+For Crispus, the rival's success matters if it created enforceable future advantage.
+
+---
+
+## 6. Titus Varenus Secundus — Camp Logistician
+
+Secundus reads the rival's success through capacity, timing, and system effect.
+
+He asks:
+
+- what cargo volume moved?
+- did the rival fill a return leg?
+- what transport capacity did he consume?
+- did his sale change future demand or only current stock?
+- what related goods are now short?
+- what load should follow the rival's success?
+
+Secundus treats the rival's venture as a signal in a supply chain.
+
+### Secundus Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: a supply movement changed remaining demand and capacity
+primary question: what secondary need follows the rival's sale?
+risk focus: copying the same cargo instead of identifying next shortage
+first action: map what the rival consumed, supplied, and left unsatisfied
+```
+
+For Secundus, the right response may not be to imitate the rival.
+
+It may be to supply what the rival's success now creates demand for.
+
+---
+
+## 7. Publius Terentius Chresimus — Guild Scribe
+
+Chresimus reads the rival's success through verified accounts.
+
+He asks:
+
+- what was the purchase cost?
+- what was the true sale value?
+- were transport and storage counted?
+- was payment fully received?
+- was the reported profit gross spread or final profit?
+- did the rival omit obligations from the story?
+
+Chresimus does not trust success until the numbers reconcile.
+
+### Chresimus Interpretation
+
+```text
+rival success: reported profit may hide uncounted costs
+primary question: what did the account actually settle to?
+risk focus: exaggerated margin, unpaid balance, omitted transport cost
+first action: verify cost, sale value, payment state, and obligations
+```
+
+For Chresimus, a rival's boast is not an account.
+
+---
+
+## 8. Same Success, Different First Actions
+
+| Actor | First Action |
+|---|---|
+| Varro | identify how movement succeeded |
+| Felix | test whether the price window remains open |
+| Lentulus | identify reputation and access gained |
+| Crispus | determine whether future terms were created |
+| Secundus | map secondary demand and consumed capacity |
+| Chresimus | verify the real settled account |
+
+The rival's success is the same.
+
+The useful lesson differs.
+
+---
+
+## 9. Shared Economic Effects
+
+A rival's success may affect commerce through:
+
+```text
+market_proof
+seller_repricing
+buyer_saturation
+rival_reputation_gain
+future_access_shift
+transport_capacity_consumed
+information_spread
+imitation_pressure
+```
+
+None of these effects is automatic.
+
+Each must be tested.
+
+---
+
+## 10. Correct Model Behavior
+
+The model should separate:
+
+| Category | Meaning |
+|---|---|
+| reported success | what is said about the rival |
+| verified outcome | what actually settled |
+| market effect | how prices, supply, or demand changed |
+| access effect | whether rival gained relationship advantage |
+| actor lens | what each actor learns first |
+| future arithmetic | how the trader's next venture changes |
+
+The model should treat rival success as information, not merely competition.
+
+---
+
+## 11. Incorrect Model Behavior
+
+The model should not:
+
+- assume rival success means the same venture remains profitable
+- assume the opportunity is gone without checking remaining demand
+- ignore the rival's new access or reputation
+- ignore seller repricing after the news spreads
+- treat a boast as a settled account
+- make all actors react with simple envy
+- copy the rival's venture without checking changed conditions
+- expose hidden true profit without a knowledge path
+
+---
+
+## 12. Layer-0, Layer-1, And Layer-2 Concepts Used
+
+This example uses:
+
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0002-goods-have-local-prices`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0005-profit-is-sale-minus-total-cost`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0007-information-arrives-unevenly`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0011-status-changes-access`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0012-every-venture-risks-loss`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0018-rivalry-changes-conditions`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0020-posture-changes-by-audience`
+- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0003-arithmetic-resolves-the-venture`
+- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0007-rival-buys-the-cart-space`
+- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0012-reputation-loss-changes-future-arithmetic`
+- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0002-conflicting-reports`
+- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0012-settlement-reveals-truth`
+
+---
+
+## 13. Success Condition
+
+If the model can treat a rival's success as a market-changing signal while producing six distinct rational readings based on execution, price window, social access, terms, capacity, and accounts, this file is functioning correctly.