# C1625 — Connect the Flood refinement to the Covenant family

## Question

Can the existing1866 Minimum Covenant cut be retained alongside both inverse Flood cuts?

## Sources

```json
[
  "Reader_before:12600 common refinement",
  "three_MSS_12600_path.json",
  "C1524–C1525"
]
```

## Opened utc

2026-09-29T15:05:37.167924+00:00

## Results

```json
{
  "nodes_BC": [
    13136,
    7536,
    5436,
    1866,
    536
  ],
  "roles": [
    "LXX Regular completed inverse head",
    "MT Cumulative completed inverse Flood",
    "SP Cumulative completed inverse Flood / MT Shem",
    "MT Minimum Covenant",
    "restoration"
  ],
  "edges": [
    5600,
    2100,
    3570,
    1330
  ],
  "units70": [
    80,
    30,
    51,
    19
  ],
  "whole": 12600,
  "Covenant_radius": 11270,
  "7000_suffix": 7000,
  "4900_suffix": 4900,
  "scope": "reuses the already-appointed1866 comparison node; no new date or mirror branch"
}
```

## Finding

The singleBC path13136→7536→5436→1866→536 has5600+2100+3570+1330. It preserves12600,7000,4900 and the11270 Covenant radius in one source-tagged refinement.

## Reassessment

The larger Strategy connection is now explicit. Integrate the source mechanisms and common paths without adding more endpoints.

## Checks

```json
{}
```

## Closed utc

2026-09-29T15:05:37.168918+00:00

## Record provenance

Exact record hash: `a1a44e24b9f84a60022adb3a4748a4b94c79780dbc0e269d60110cf5c47099af`

Source journal: `Research_Cycles/C1585_C1634/journal.json`