What Records Are Of: Reference, Content, and Misrepresentation Without a Global Interpreter

This is the thirteenth paper of a series that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates, and the opening panel of its third triptych: reference, then testimony, then objectivity. The twelfth paper analysed when an embedded observer may trust its records, and in the course of doing so treated the content of evidence as a declared apparent-content class at a declared grain, with the apparent-content map taken as an input rather than grounded. The ninth paper separated, at the token level, causal provenance, veridicality, and kind-level reliability, and introduced the record-like inscription that lacks provenance; the tenth fixed operational content by an implemented decoder and its preset resolution classes, while establishing that an observer's grip on its records secures their downstream use but never their upstream provenance. This paper supplies the missing content-side foundation. It asks what, inside a history with no global interpreter, fixes which event a record is of, what it says, under which scheme, and whether it misrepresents, and it argues that causal provenance alone fixes none of these. Its contribution is threefold. First, it provides a typed architecture of representation. It separates a standing representation architecture - a channel architecture, a consumer with a declared function-grounding basis and normal-function conditions, a calibration network, and a semantic scheme - from the token-level, target-relative provenance by which a token bears an admissible lineage from the very target it is taken to be of. It also separates three quantities that a single notion of content conflates: apparent or decoded content, referent, and full referential content. Second, it provides a typed status structure in which provenance, reference, and correctness are separately typed and non-entailing rather than collapsed into one trichotomy. Veridical records, erroneous records, misrepresenting and accidentally matching record-like inscriptions, reference failure, and reference indeterminacy therefore become distinct. A record-like inscription is a category whose distinguishing defect is the absence of provenance from its purported targets, not a third semantic outcome. Third, the paper grounds the twelfth paper's apparent-content map and content class as a physically implemented, pre-inferential integration of decoded token contents, with the admissible relation between the decoder's native grain and the declared evidential comparison grain made explicit. The scope is bounded. The central object is classical or effectively classical records. Fixing reference and content certifies neither veridicality nor provenance. The construction is robust only within a declared content architecture, with inter-observer invariance and objectivity deferred to later panels. The paper contributes a reference-specification problem rather than a complete theory of reference, and introduces no global interpreter assigning meaning from outside the history.