The literature

This page exists so that nobody has to take the article on trust.  Every source it rests on is listed here with what it actually measured, who wrote it, and which way it cuts.

It is deliberately not a reading list of things that agree with this site.  The source that does the most damage to the young-earth compression model is not a radiocarbon paper at all;  it is two short reports by Ian Hodder on how many times a wall at Çatalhöyük was plastered and how long a house stood.  The source that concedes most to the creationist side is Bar-Yosef 1986, a mainstream paper that says tells are mud-brick collapse and that the Levant was wetter, exactly as Osgood argued.  Both are tagged by what their data show, not by what their authors believe.

How to read an entry

Measurement or model.  A radiocarbon determination on a named sample is an observation.  A Bayesian site chronology is a model and inherits its priors.  A count of plaster layers is an observation;  the claim that they are annual is an inference from a dendrochronological correlation.  These are kept apart.

Direction.  Assigned by what the source shows, not by what its author believes.

Verified.  Whether this project read the text directly (full), only its abstract or a table (abstract), or only through another source that quotes it (via).  Nothing is quoted in the main article unless it is marked full, and every quotation was read out of downloaded bytes.

Field definitions

Coverage and its limits, stated plainly.  This catalogue covers the primary chronology for five sites, the Ubaid and Sumerian King List background, and every creationist treatment of Göbekli Tepe or the Neolithic tells that could be found at CMI, AiG, ICR and the ICC proceedings.  Eight items could not be obtained and are listed at the bottom.  Two of them, Matthews 2005 and Kuniholm & Newton 1996, are the primaries behind the article's strongest argument, and the article says so.

Site chronology

Establishing a Radiocarbon Sequence for Göbekli Tepe. State of Research and New Data

Dietrich, Oliver, Çiğdem Köksal-Schmidt, Jens Notroff & Klaus Schmidt.  Neo-Lithics 1/13:36–41, 2013.

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  KIA-44149, Enclosure D wall plaster, 9984 ± 42 ¹⁴C BP, 9745–9314 cal BC;  three charcoal samples at bedrock in Enclosure D, 9960–9990 ± 30 BP, 9664–9311 cal BC;  Layer III north of Enclosure D, 9540 ± 30 BP, 9127–8763 cal BC;  IGAS-2658, 8880 ± 60 BP, 8241–7795 cal BC.

The AMS series that fixes Layer III, and the paper Cox 2021 reads.  The structural date is the wall plaster, which dates the standing building rather than its fill.  The paper also reports pedogenic-carbonate dates that ran "clearly too young" and were set aside, which is the passage Cox quotes without its resolution.  Cited in the article.

Göbekli Tepe, Turkey. A brief summary of research at a new World Heritage Site (2015–2019)

Clare, Lee.  e-Forschungsberichte des DAI 2020, Faszikel 2:81–88.  https://doi.org/10.34780/efb.v0i2.1012

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: review direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  site span ~9500–8000 cal BC;  PPNA round-oval domestic structures on bedrock;  dense EPPNB domestic occupation;  mortar dates showing final building phases "in excess of five centuries after their initial foundation";  Layer II/III overlap;  intentional backfilling withdrawn in favour of slope-slide inundation.

The head of the project reporting that four of its own headline claims were wrong.  Cuts both ways and the article gives both halves:  the first-temple reading, the tripartite stratigraphy and the ritual backfilling are all withdrawn, which is a real case of interpretation overturned;  and every correction lengthens the site's life.  Cited in the article.  CC BY-NC-ND.

The Walls of Jericho: An Alternative Interpretation

Bar-Yosef, Ofer.  Current Anthropology 27(2):157–162, 1986.  https://doi.org/10.1086/203413

camp: mainstream topic: tell-formation method: review direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  tower 8.2 m high, 9 m base, 22 steps, about 1,000 tons;  fourteen radiocarbon determinations with lab numbers, uncalibrated, 8350 ± 200 to 7250 ± 70 bc;  PPNA deposits 3.5–4.5 m, 8.5 m at the tower;  Natufian-to-PPNA gap ca. 9200–8350 bc.

Concedes two of Osgood's three planks in as many words, that the Levant was wetter and that tells form by mud-brick collapse and rebuild, and supplies the deposit thickness Osgood never had.  Reads the wall and tower as flood defence rather than fortification.  Its dates are uncalibrated;  calibration makes Jericho older.  Cited in the article.

Interim Report on the Excavations at Tell es-Sultan, Ancient Jericho (2019–2023): The Bronze and Iron Age Cities

Nigro, Lorenzo & Jehad Yasine.  Vicino Oriente XXIX:47–96, 2024.  https://doi.org/10.53131/VO2724-587X2024-2_4

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: review direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  Table 1, the period-by-period absolute chronology from Late Natufian 10500–8800 BC through PPNA 8800–7500, PPNB 7500–6300, Pottery Neolithic, Chalcolithic 4300–3500, every Early Bronze subphase, to the Iron Age.

The excavator's own table, used to place each Flood date inside the sequence:  Masoretic 2518 BC in EB IIIB, Ussher 2348 in EB IVA, Septuagint 3298 in EB IB.  Defers the PPNA tower to a separate study.  Cited in the article.

Isotopic and proteomic evidence for communal stability at Pre-Pottery Neolithic Jericho in the Southern Levant

Wang, Xiaoran, et al.  Scientific Reports 13:16360, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-43549-1

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  52 enamel samples from 44 PPN individuals;  strontium standard deviation 0.000058 over 49 samples;  site summary of over 10,000 years "without any apparent significant breaks in occupation".

A 2023 statement from a team with no stake in the chronology that Jericho was occupied continuously across every proposed Flood horizon.  The continuity sentence is a summary citing Kenyon, and it conflicts with Bar-Yosef's Natufian gap at the bottom of the sequence;  the article reports both.  Cited.  CC BY 4.0.

A tale of two tells: dating the Çatalhöyük West Mound

Orton, David, et al.  Antiquity 92(363):620–639, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.91

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: model direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  East Mound 21 m sequence, levels XII to 0 plus four pre-XII;  Mellaart's c. 7100 BC start "remarkably accurate";  end 6015–5905 BC (last house) and 5975–5865 BC (cessation), quoting Marciniak 2015;  West Mound overlap of up to two centuries.

Carries the East Mound start and end dates at one remove, because Bayliss 2015 and Marciniak 2015 are closed.  Also the source of the 21 m depth used in the computation.  Cited in the article.  CC BY.

Archaeobotanical evidence reveals the origins of bread 14,400 years ago in northeastern Jordan

Arranz-Otaegui, Amaia, et al.  PNAS 115(31):7925–7930, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801071115

camp: mainstream topic: site-chronology method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  24 charred food remains from two fireplaces at Shubayqa 1;  seven dates on short-lived charred seeds, 14.4–14.2 ka cal BP;  site 14.6–11.6 ka cal BP.

The extreme case, dated on the material every laboratory prefers.  Also supplies the concession that cereal use grew gradually over 2,500 years.  Cited.  CC BY-NC-ND.

Epipalaeolithic animal tending to Neolithic herding at Abu Hureyra, Syria (12,800–7,800 calBP): Deciphering dung spherulites

Smith, Alexia, Amanda Oechsner et al.  PLOS ONE 17(9):e0272947, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272947

camp: mainstream topic: domestication method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  phase table 13,300 to 7,800 cal BP on IntCal20;  dung fuel by hunter-gatherers in 1B;  spherulite drop in 2B–2C when herding surpassed gazelle hunting.

A fourth long sequence beside Göbekli Tepe, Jericho and Çatalhöyük, and an independent proxy for the herding chronology.  The site's Younger Dryas impact controversy does not touch the phase table.  Cited.  CC BY.

Tell formation and the layer count

Symbolism at Çatalhöyük

Hodder, Ian.  Proceedings of the British Academy 99:177–191, 1999.  https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/3850/99p177.pdf

camp: mainstream topic: tell-formation method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  up to 40 replasterings on the walls and floors of Building 1, read as annual on dendrochronological correlation (Kuniholm & Newton 1996);  population estimate 2,000–10,000 at p. 177.

This was the sentence the article's non-radiocarbon argument leaned on in draft.  The chapter it cites was obtained during verification and does not contain the correlation:  see the Kuniholm & Newton entry below and quarantine.md item 5.  Still cited, but only to report the defect;  no year count is drawn from plaster.

Çatalhöyük. A Summary of Recent Work Concerning Architecture

Hodder, Ian.  In B. Söğüt (ed.), Festschrift for Ahmet A. Tirpan, 303–314.  Istanbul:  Ege Yayınları, 2012.

camp: mainstream topic: tell-formation method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  over 450 plasters in the main room of Building 5 (Matthews 2005);  plastering "annual, seasonal and monthly";  houses lived in 50–100 years, walls braced;  4–6 rebuilds in place;  62 burials in Building 1.

Supplies the measured house life that is the binding constraint in the computation, and the periodicity caveat that keeps the 450 count from being read as years.  After the Kuniholm & Newton citation failed, the 50-to-100-year house life became the single number the article leans on hardest, and Hodder gives no method for it in this four-page chapter.  Cited.

Interim dendrochronological progress report 1995/6

Kuniholm, Peter I. & Maryanne W. Newton.  Chapter 17 in Ian Hodder (ed.), On the Surface:  Çatalhöyük 1993–95, 345–348.  Cambridge and London:  McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research and BIAA, 1997.  https://archive.org/details/onsurfacecatalho0000unse

camp: mainstream topic: tell-formation method: measurement direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  a 570-year floating tree-ring chronology from nine trees spanning Mellaart's levels IV–VII;  CTL-16 (level VII) terminal ring 132 years earlier than the last preserved ring of CTL-6 (level VIB), so level VII plus part of VIB span "at least 132 years";  chronology not yet convertible to calendar years, decadal samples sent to Arizona for wiggle-matching;  no bark on most timbers, so level end dates are not in stratigraphic order.

Obtained during verification by archive.org search-inside on a printdisabled item, with the leaf-to-page map from the item's public _scandata.xml and confirmed against the BIAA contents list.  Two results:  it supplies the article's only radiocarbon-free duration measurement, and it shows that Hodder 1999 cites it for an annual-replastering correlation it does not contain.  Cited.

Multiple surfaces: the micromorphology

Matthews, Wendy, Charles French, Timothy Lawrence & David Cutler.  Chapter 15 in Ian Hodder (ed.), On the Surface:  Çatalhöyük 1993–95, 301–342.  Cambridge and London:  McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research and BIAA, 1997.

camp: mainstream topic: tell-formation method: measurement direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  one 3 cm collapsed wall-plaster fragment (sample Ch94.24, Area E) with "160 layers of plaster", comprising "80 couplets" of a preparation layer plus a finishing coat;  preparatory layers 24–720 µm, finishing coats 12–552 µm;  no periodicity assigned;  the sample of five buildings gives "no conclusive evidence" on whether floors and walls were replastered at the same frequency.

The primary layer count, by the same author as the unobtainable Matthews 2005 and on the same material.  It replaces the second-hand "over 450" figure as the article's anchor, and its silence on periodicity is why the article counts no years from plaster.  Cited.

Deposit-rate computation (this project)

research/deposit-rate-test.ts, run with deno run -A.  Inputs:  Orton 2018 (21 m, 7100–5920 cal BC, 17 levels;  West Mound to 5600 BC from p. 630), Bar-Yosef 1986 (3.5–8.5 m PPNA, p. 161), Osgood 1986 (7.5–15 year house life), Hodder 2012 (50–100 year house life), Kuniholm & Newton 1997 (132-ring gap), Matthews et al. 1997 (80 couplets).  Output reproduced in the article and re-run during verification.  Shows that Osgood's mechanism can build 21 m in 200–800 years and that the counted building levels, not the depth, are what fail to fit 330 years.

Domestication

Domestication and early agriculture in the Mediterranean Basin: Origins, diffusion, and impact

Zeder, Melinda A.  PNAS 105(33):11597–11604, 2008.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0801317105

camp: mainstream topic: domestication method: review direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  goats managed at Ganj Dareh, directly dated 9,900 BP, no morphological change;  four livestock species under management 11,000–10,000 BP, morphological markers not until 9,500–9,000 BP;  plant management from 12,000 BP, non-shattering cereals not established until 10,500 BP;  four to six goat and five cattle domestic lineages.

Stands in for Zeder 2011, which is closed.  The management dates rest on harvest-profile demography, an inference the article flags;  the Ganj Dareh goats are directly dated.  Cited.

Early canid domestication: the farm-fox experiment

Trut, Lyudmila N.  American Scientist 87:160–169, 1999.

camp: mainstream topic: domestication method: measurement direction: complicates verified: full

Belyaev's silver foxes, selected for tameness, became tame and morphologically altered in about 40 generations.  The best available creationist answer to the domestication lag, and given a fair hearing under objections.  Cited without quotation.

Mesopotamia

Beyond the Ubaid: Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies of the Middle East

Carter, Robert A. & Graham Philip (eds.).  SAOC 63.  Chicago:  Oriental Institute, 2010.  https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/saoc63.pdf

camp: mainstream topic: mesopotamia method: review direction: undercuts verified: full

Key figures:  southern Ubaid 6500–3800 BC;  in other regions only 5300–4300 BC;  the numerical phases "not consistently defined".

The standard reference on the period Osgood's Part 2 compresses into 330 years.  Concedes the regional looseness of the Ubaid label, which the article reports in the creationists' favour.  Cited.

The Sumerian King List

Jacobsen, Thorkild.  Assyriological Studies 11.  Chicago:  University of Chicago Press, 1939.

camp: mainstream topic: mesopotamia method: review direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  p. 77, the flood line;  p. 77 n. 38, "the secondary section on the antediluvian period which was added";  p. 56, three manuscripts with the section, four without;  p. 60, its setting "in the lore of Eridu(g)".

The critical edition, and its own editor's verdict that the flood section is an import.  Cuts against a common apologetic use of the list, and the article says so.  Cited.

Atra-ḫasīs: The Babylonian Story of the Flood

Lambert, W. G. & A. R. Millard.  Oxford:  Clarendon Press, 1969.

camp: mainstream topic: mesopotamia method: review direction: undercuts verified: full

Pages 16–17 on the flood layers "at various sites and on several occasions" and the editors' refusal to relate all flood stories to one disaster.  Locator carried from agents/memory/primeval-chronology-downstream.md.  Cited.

Ur of the Chaldees

Woolley, Leonard.  Harmondsworth:  Penguin, 1950.

camp: mainstream topic: mesopotamia method: commentary direction: undercuts verified: full

Printed pp. 22 and 29, read on archive.org with the leaf offset anchored on running heads;  the locator is carried from the memory file and the book is not in the source library.  Woolley's own statement that some local centres survived the flood he found.  Cited.

The antediluvian patriarchs and the Sumerian King List

López, Raúl E.  Journal of Creation 12(3):347–357, 1998.

camp: creationist topic: mesopotamia method: hypothesis direction: background verified: full

Argues the 241,200-year total and the Genesis 5 ages are the same numbers in sexagesimal and decimal.  An argument about number-writing, not the Neolithic;  noted in the article so a reader knows it exists.  Cited by key only.

The young-earth literature

A Better Model for the Stone Age

Osgood, A. J. M.  EN Tech. J. 2:88–102, 1986.  https://creation.com/a-better-model-for-the-stone-age

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: model direction: supports verified: full

Key figures:  Babel 2200 BC, Abraham in Canaan 1870 BC, 330 years for the whole world's Stone Age;  radiocarbon and dendrochronology rejected outright;  Jarmo house life 15 years, halved for wet conditions;  Palaeolithic, Neolithic and Chalcolithic "could well be contemporary".

The only sustained creationist model, and the source of every later treatment.  Its one testable claim, the deposit rate, is computed in the article and succeeds on volume while failing on counted layers.  Its author says in print that he cannot give a number.  Cited at length.

A Better Model for the Stone Age, Part 2

Osgood, A. J. M.  https://creation.com/a-better-model-for-the-stone-age-part-2  No volume or page is printed by creation.com and none is invented here.

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: model direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  25,000 people at Babel;  46 initial cultures;  all cultures outside lower Mesopotamia after 2200 BC;  the west-to-east "sloping chronology".

The population figure is far above what Carter & Hardy's 2015 model allows.  The sloping-chronology observation is real and is equally the prediction of demic diffusion from a Fertile Crescent origin.  Cited.

The Times of Abraham

Osgood, A. J. M.  creation.com.  Library key osgood-1986b.

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: model direction: background verified: full

Saved with the Stone Age papers as the source of Osgood's 1870 BC Abraham date.  Not cited;  the date is taken from the Stone Age paper itself.

Modelling biblical human population growth

Carter, Robert & Chris Hardy.  Journal of Creation 29(1):72–79, 2015.

camp: creationist topic: babel method: model direction: complicates verified: full

Page 76:  more than 1,000 people at 100 years after the Flood under some settings, 40,000 only under "not likely scenarios".  Used against Osgood's 25,000.  Locator carried from the memory file and re-verified there against the page image.  Cited.

How does Göbekli Tepe fit with biblical history?

Sanders, Lita & Robert Carter.  Creation Ministries International, 26 July 2011.  https://creation.com/gobekli-tepe

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: commentary direction: supports verified: full

"The dates are wrong", "soon after the Flood", and the hunter-gatherer plausibility objection.  No chronology.  The hunter-gatherer point has since been partly conceded by Clare 2020's domestic structures and partly answered by them.  Cited.

Do claimed dates for Göbekli Tepe and the Lost City of Dwarka outdate the Bible's timeline?

Cox, Gavin.  Creation Ministries International, 23 December 2021.  https://creation.com/gobekli-tepe-lost-city-of-dwarka-age

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: commentary direction: supports verified: full

The only creationist piece that reads Dietrich 2013.  Audited against the PDF:  all four quotations verbatim;  ¹⁴C-BP values printed as years BC;  the "fail to provide absolute chronological points of reference" sentence quoted without the preceding "clearly too young" or the following wall-plaster date;  the backfill caveat since withdrawn by Clare 2020.  Cited at length.

A Creationist View of Gӧbekli Tepe: Timeline and Other Considerations

Habermehl, Anne.  Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, 7–13.  Pittsburgh, 2018.

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: hypothesis direction: complicates verified: full

Key figures:  founded about 210 years after Babel (MT), 400 (LXX);  "as little as 25 years" for the whole site;  Babel dispersion at 1.76 million conventional years;  the map drawn by eye, stated approximate twice.

The most serious creationist treatment, and the only falsifiable one.  Falsified by Clare 2020's five-century building sequence.  Cited at length.

Gӧbekli Tepe: Why Does This Site Fascinate?

Habermehl, Anne.  creationsixdays.net, December 2015.  http://www.creationsixdays.net/GobekliTepe.htm

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: commentary direction: complicates verified: full

A site visit with Lee Clare and a different date from the same author:  "around 2500 BC (LXX) or 2100 BC (MT)".  Used to show the spread of creationist dates.  Cited.

Where in the World Is the Tower of Babel?

Habermehl, Anne.  Answers Research Journal 4:25–53, 2011.  https://answersresearchjournal.org/where-is-the-tower-of-babel/

camp: creationist topic: babel method: hypothesis direction: complicates verified: full

Shinar as the Khabur triangle.  Moves Babel into the Halaf and Ubaid tells rather than away from them.  Also the source of the 106-year problem and the admission that no Ice Age model fits the Septuagint.  HTML has no page numbers;  locators are section headings.  Cited.

Oard's Ice Age and Settlement of Northern Europe on Masoretic and Septuagint Timelines

Tweedy, Eric J.  Answers Research Journal 17:763–783, 2024.

camp: creationist topic: ice-age method: model direction: complicates verified: full

Page 779:  Oard's model "most likely is not compatible with the Masoretic Text and secular settlement traditions", and aligns with the Septuagint "without alteration".  Quoted against Habermehl 2011 with every hedge kept.  Cited.

Ancient Apocalypse Part 2: 'What the Sites Mean in a Biblical Worldview'

Lacey, Troy & Avery Foley.  Answers in Genesis, 21 February 2023.  https://answersingenesis.org/reviews/movies/ancient-apocalypse-part-2/

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: commentary direction: supports verified: full

The only AiG date for Göbekli Tepe, 2150–1900 BC, and the same for Karahan Tepe.  No reasoning.  Supplies a compression ratio of six.  Cited.

Oldest Temple Topples Evolutionists' History of Religion

Thomas, Brian.  Institute for Creation Research, 12 January 2012.  https://www.icr.org/article/oldest-temple-topples-evolutionists/

camp: creationist topic: yec-argument method: commentary direction: supports verified: full

No chronological claim.  Attacks the religion-after-agriculture story, which Clare 2020 says the excavators themselves promoted and now withdraw.  Cited once.

Considered and not used

• Woods, Visible Language (OIMP 32), p. 34, Uruk at 20,000–50,000 people. Verified in the memory file. Not cited; Uruk is fourth-millennium and belongs to the Egypt and Mesopotamian chronology articles.
• ETCSL Sumerian King List translation. In the library and verified. Not cited; Jacobsen's edition carries the same line with the editorial apparatus the article needs.
• Roffet-Salque et al. 2018 and 2019, Wainwright 2019, Mazzucato 2024, the Çatalhöyük teleconnection exchange. In the library. Not cited except as the cal BP misprint warning in a footnote; the end date is taken from Orton.
• Bruins & van der Plicht 1995, Kennedy 2023, Jericho radiocarbon and the Late Bronze destruction. In the library. Not cited; they belong to the Conquest article.
• Moore 1982, Jasim on Tell Abada, Robert North, Osgood's references 5, 7 and 8. Not fetched. Osgood's report of them is accepted as accurate for what it claims, that neighbouring cultures overlap, because that claim is not in dispute.
• Moore et al. 2020 on the Abu Hureyra airburst. Not fetched. It does not bear on the phase chronology.
• Osgood's Part 2 "sloping chronology" and 46-culture passages. Read; not cited, for length.

Could not be obtained

• Zeder, "The Origins of Agriculture in the Near East," Current Anthropology 52(S4):S221–S235, 2011. Closed at the publisher; OpenAlex reports no repository copy; no Europe PMC record. Zeder 2008 stands in. A JSTOR read would open it.
• Bayliss et al., "Getting to the Bottom of It All," Journal of World Prehistory 28:1–26, 2015. Springer serves a stub. Re-checked during verification: the Stirling repository record 1893/21950 is request-only and returns 403 on both the bitstream URL and the DSpace-7 content API, and OpenAlex reports oa_status: closed with no repository full text. Start date carried via Orton 2018, whose wording was checked verbatim at p. 624.
• Marciniak et al., "Fragmenting times," Antiquity 89:154–176, 2015. Closed. Its Stirling record 1893/28453 carries no open bitstream. End dates carried via Orton 2018 and attributed as such; Orton's wording and his own attribution "(Marciniak et al. 2015: 172–73)" were checked verbatim at p. 624.
• Mallowan, "Noah's Flood Reconsidered," Iraq 26:62–82, 1964. On JSTOR. The standard treatment of the Kish and Shuruppak layers. A metered JSTOR read was authorised for it and deliberately not spent: the two claims it was carrying were unsourced and have been withdrawn instead, so the article now makes no statement about the height or date of the Kish and Shuruppak layers.
• A primary Karahan Tepe excavation report with radiocarbon. Not found open. No radiocarbon figure for the site is printed.
• Kenyon, Excavations at Jericho vols. 3–5, 1981–1983. Not read. The fourteen dates are as transmitted in Bar-Yosef's Table 1.
• Matthews 2005, the micromorphology chapter in Hodder (ed.), Inhabiting Çatalhöyük, McDonald Monograph 38, pp. 355–98. The primary for the 450-plaster count and the periodicity. Not on archive.org under any title variant; no open BIAA or McDonald PDF; on JSTOR only. No metered read spent, because Matthews et al. 1997 supplies a primary count from the same author on the same material.
• Kenyon's original Trench I radiocarbon report. The fifteen determinations are as transmitted in Bar-Yosef's Table 1.