diff --git a/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0004-same-credit-offer-six-readings.md b/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0004-same-credit-offer-six-readings.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..12444f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0004-same-credit-offer-six-readings.md
@@ -0,0 +1,301 @@
+# CORPUS-0004
+## Same Credit Offer, Six Readings
+### Status: Training Corpus Seed
+### Layer: Layer_3--Actor_Perspective
+### Purpose: Teach that the same deferred-payment offer can be interpreted differently by each actor profile without changing the underlying obligation
+### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_3--Actor_Perspective/CORPUS-0004-same-credit-offer-six-readings.md
+
+---
+
+## 0. Scenario
+
+A seller in Ostia offers oil to a trader without requiring full coin payment immediately.
+
+The seller proposes deferred settlement after the trader sells the oil in Capua.
+
+The offer appears helpful.
+
+All six actors hear the same terms.
+
+They do not interpret the offer the same way.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Shared Offer Terms
+
+| Term | Value |
+|---|---:|
+| Good | oil |
+| Immediate coin required | 0 asses |
+| Oil value advanced | 20 asses |
+| Payment due after Capua sale | 22 asses |
+| Expected Capua sale value | 34 asses |
+| Movement and handling cost | 6 asses |
+| Expected total cost | 28 asses |
+| Expected profit | 6 asses |
+
+Expected arithmetic if sale succeeds:
+
+```text
+34 - (22 + 6) = 6 asses profit
+```
+
+All six actors can see that the offer allows action without immediate coin.
+
+They disagree about what the offer really means.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Marcus Atilius Varro — Former Legionary
+
+Varro reads the offer through obligation and execution.
+
+He asks:
+
+- can the trader deliver before payment comes due?
+- what happens if the cart is delayed?
+- is the seller reliable under pressure?
+- does the obligation create distraction during movement?
+- can the route support the promised timing?
+- does the plan depend on too many people keeping word?
+
+Varro does not treat credit as easy freedom.
+
+He treats it as a burden that must be carried cleanly.
+
+### Varro Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: useful only if execution is reliable
+primary concern: obligation tied to movement schedule
+risk focus: delay causing failure to settle
+decision bias: accept only with disciplined route and clear timing
+```
+
+For Varro, credit creates mission pressure.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Lucius Fabius Felix — Freedman Trader
+
+Felix reads the offer through leverage and opportunity.
+
+He asks:
+
+- why is the seller offering credit?
+- does the seller need movement more than coin?
+- can the payment term be reduced?
+- can the oil be sold before others know the seller is flexible?
+- can part of the obligation be settled through goods or introductions?
+- is the seller revealing weakness?
+
+Felix sees credit as a chance to act larger than his purse.
+
+He also suspects the seller has a reason for offering it.
+
+### Felix Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: useful leverage if seller pressure is real
+primary concern: why the seller accepts delayed coin
+risk focus: hidden weakness, bad stock, seller changing terms
+decision bias: bargain harder and move before terms vanish
+```
+
+For Felix, the offer is not generosity.
+
+It is pressure made visible.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Quintus Cornelius Lentulus Minor — Noble Younger Son
+
+Lentulus reads the offer through social meaning and future standing.
+
+He asks:
+
+- does accepting credit imply weakness?
+- who will know he accepted deferred terms?
+- does the seller gain a claim over him?
+- can the arrangement be framed as partnership rather than need?
+- does the seller have useful connections?
+- will repayment enhance or reduce reputation?
+
+Lentulus may reject useful credit if it makes him appear dependent.
+
+He may accept it if it creates a respectable tie.
+
+### Lentulus Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: socially dangerous unless framed properly
+primary concern: appearance of dependency
+risk focus: visible obligation to a lower-status seller
+decision bias: accept only if relationship improves standing or remains discreet
+```
+
+For Lentulus, the same credit can be assistance, embarrassment, or alliance.
+
+---
+
+## 5. Gaius Licinius Crispus — Failed Magistrate
+
+Crispus reads the offer through enforceability and terms.
+
+He asks:
+
+- is the agreement witnessed?
+- when exactly is payment due?
+- what happens if Capua payment is late?
+- is interest or premium hidden in the 22-ass settlement?
+- can the seller demand payment before resale?
+- who bears loss if the cargo is damaged?
+- what remedy exists if either party disputes terms?
+
+Crispus sees credit as a legal structure.
+
+He wants the obligation defined before the goods move.
+
+### Crispus Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: acceptable if terms are enforceable and complete
+primary concern: settlement terms and remedies
+risk focus: ambiguous due date, disputed loss, unclear witness
+decision bias: document the obligation before accepting cargo
+```
+
+For Crispus, credit without terms is future conflict.
+
+---
+
+## 6. Titus Varenus Secundus — Camp Logistician
+
+Secundus reads the offer through capacity and flow.
+
+He asks:
+
+- does credit allow the cart to depart full?
+- is the oil ready now?
+- can return cargo support settlement?
+- does the deferred obligation improve or worsen load planning?
+- can the trader combine the oil with another shipment?
+- does the seller's need align with existing movement?
+
+Secundus is less interested in the social meaning of credit.
+
+He wants to know whether it makes movement more efficient.
+
+### Secundus Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: useful if it fills capacity and supports route flow
+primary concern: whether deferred settlement improves movement efficiency
+risk focus: load mismatch, late buyer payment, return leg ignored
+decision bias: accept if credit turns unused capacity into moving value
+```
+
+For Secundus, credit is useful when it keeps goods, carts, and settlement moving together.
+
+---
+
+## 7. Publius Terentius Chresimus — Guild Scribe
+
+Chresimus reads the offer through records and hidden obligations.
+
+He asks:
+
+- is the 22-ass obligation recorded?
+- is the oil already pledged to someone else?
+- is the quantity exact?
+- is quality described?
+- does the seller retain a claim until payment?
+- how is partial payment recorded?
+- does the account show credit or sale?
+
+Chresimus does not trust the offer until the account can distinguish custody, title, and payment.
+
+### Chresimus Interpretation
+
+```text
+credit offer: unresolved until recorded clearly
+primary concern: account category and obligation trail
+risk focus: double claim, unclear title, partial settlement confusion
+decision bias: record quantity, quality, due date, and claim status
+```
+
+For Chresimus, the offer is not understood until the ledger can hold it.
+
+---
+
+## 8. Same Offer, Different Decisions
+
+| Actor | Likely Reading | First Action |
+|---|---|---|
+| Varro | obligation tied to timing | confirm route and schedule |
+| Felix | seller pressure visible | bargain harder and move fast |
+| Lentulus | social dependency risk | frame or conceal relationship |
+| Crispus | enforceable obligation | define witnessed terms |
+| Secundus | capacity opportunity | integrate with cart and return flow |
+| Chresimus | accounting exposure | record quantity, title, and due date |
+
+The offer is the same.
+
+The decision threshold differs.
+
+---
+
+## 9. Correct Model Behavior
+
+The model should separate:
+
+| Category | Meaning |
+|---|---|
+| shared terms | the credit offer itself |
+| obligation created | what must be repaid |
+| actor lens | what each actor notices first |
+| actor risk focus | what each actor fears |
+| actor first action | how each actor makes the offer usable or safer |
+| final arithmetic | resolved only after sale and settlement |
+
+Credit does not remove cost.
+
+Actor perspective changes how the cost and obligation are understood.
+
+---
+
+## 10. Incorrect Model Behavior
+
+The model should not:
+
+- treat credit as free goods
+- make all actors accept or reject for the same reason
+- ignore social meaning of obligation
+- ignore enforceability
+- ignore movement and timing risk
+- ignore records, title, and partial settlement
+- assume a favorable expected profit makes the offer safe
+- collapse trust, obligation, and arithmetic into one value
+
+---
+
+## 11. Layer-0, Layer-1, And Layer-2 Concepts Used
+
+This example uses:
+
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0003-money-has-purchasing-power`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0009-liquidity-differs-from-wealth`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0010-credit-depends-on-trust`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0011-status-changes-access`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0013-non-coin-settlement-exists`
+- `Layer_0/CORPUS-0020-posture-changes-by-audience`
+- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0009-credit-allows-action-without-coin`
+- `Layer_1/CORPUS-0011-round-trip-cart-value`
+- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0005-hidden-true-state-vs-known-state`
+- `Layer_2/CORPUS-0012-settlement-reveals-truth`
+
+---
+
+## 12. Success Condition
+
+If the model can present one deferred-payment offer and generate six different rational readings without treating credit as free value or changing the underlying obligation, this file is functioning correctly.