Ergot (Claviceps purpurea) remains were identified inside a ceremonial vessel and in human dental calculus at Mas Castellar de Pontós, an Iberian site with a sanctuary linked to the two Eleusinian goddesses (4th–2nd century BCE).

A real, load-bearing find, but still a single 2002 analysis seen through the 2026 paper's citations (TIK-E007), never independently replicated; capped until TIK-R004 audits the primary publication.

The Mas Castellar find uniquely combines ergot, ingestion evidence and a Demeter/Kore cultic setting (TIK-E007), but it is a single 2002 analysis, never replicated, read here only through the 2026 paper's citations. Grade stays capped until TIK-R004 retrieves the primary report.

The single find combining ergot, ingestion evidence, and a Demeter/Kore cultic setting (TIK-E007) — but one unreplicated 2002 analysis known here only through the 2026 paper's citation. Capped pending TIK-R004; repeated citation is not replication.

A 2002 analysis reported ergot fragments in a ceremonial vessel and in human dental calculus at an Iberian site with ties to Demeter, providing the only substance-in-cult-context datum. The strongest opposing consideration is that this rests on a single, un-replicated study from over two decades ago at a site a thousand kilometers from Eleusis, carrying a documented risk of secondary source drift that rhetorically elevates "fragments" to chemically confirmed hallucinogens.

The Mas Castellar ergot finding is reported in a 2002 study and referenced by the 2026 paper: ergot microremains in a ceremonial vessel and in dental calculus at a Demeter/Persephone sanctuary in Iberia. Taken at face value, that supports the existence of ergot in cult context and probable consumption there. However, the primary report has not been obtained in this case, the analysis has never been independently replicated, and the site is geographically and culturally distinct from Eleusis. These factors, especially dependence on secondhand citation, are the main reasons to temper confidence pending re-analysis.

As carried by Antonopoulos et al. 2026, the 2002 Mas Castellar analysis reported fragments of Claviceps purpurea inside a ceremonial vessel and in the dental calculus of a young man at a Demeter/Kore-linked sanctuary near a Greek colony — the only datum in the case that combines substance, ingestion, and cult context. The primary chapters have not been obtained; the analysis has never been independently replicated; and downstream retellings that convert "fragments of ergot" into "hallucinogenic alkaloids chemically detected" outrun the record. The strongest opposing consideration is the stacked limitation of a single unreplicated twenty-four-year-old identification, known here only through secondary citation, at a site a thousand kilometres from Eleusis, which cannot by itself establish dose, deliberate preparation, or Attic practice.

There is a real, specific report behind this claim: fragments of ergot identified in a ceremonial vessel and in human dental calculus at a Demeter/Kore-linked Iberian sanctuary (TIK-E007), combining substance, ingestion evidence, and cult context — the most diagnostic datum on the Greek side. But it rests on a single 2002 analysis, never independently replicated, which this case has seen only through the 2026 paper's citations; the primary chapters are unverified and unobtained. The strongest opposing consideration is exactly that fragility plus the documented source-drift hazard: "fragments of ergot identified" has been hardened downstream into "hallucinogenic alkaloids chemically detected," which the record does not state, and even a confirmed presence would not establish dose, deliberateness, or purpose. Provisional support with low confidence pending TIK-R004 is the honest grade.

A published 2002 archaeobotanical analysis reported ergot fragments in a ceremonial vessel and in a young man's dental calculus at a Demeter/Kore-linked Iberian site; microremain identification of Claviceps sclerotia fragments is a routine task, and the find is cited with page-level references in a 2026 peer-reviewed paper. But the evidential chain here is thin in an unusual way: the primary chapters have not been obtained by this case at all, so every statement about sampling, controls and context is secondhand, and the analysis has never been independently replicated in twenty-four years. The strongest opposing consideration is documented source drift — "fragments of ergot identified" hardening downstream into "hallucinogenic alkaloids chemically detected" — which means the version circulating in the debate is demonstrably stronger than the record supports. TIK-R004's desk half would settle the grading almost for free.

Real and load-bearing, but a single 2002 analysis, never replicated, so far seen mainly through secondary citations; the grade is capped until the primary text is audited and the samples re-analyzed (TIK-R004).

The only datum combining ergot, ingestion evidence, and a Demeter/Kore context (TIK-E007), but one 2002 analysis, never replicated, known here only through the 2026 paper's citation, and a thousand kilometres from Eleusis. Analogy, not identity. Grade capped pending TIK-R004.

The single datum joining ergot, ingestion evidence, and a Demeter/Kore cultic setting (TIK-E007), but one 2002 analysis, never independently replicated, and known to this case only through the 2026 paper's citation. Repeated citation is not replication; the grade stays capped pending TIK-R004.

Real, peer-contextualized, and load-bearing — and resting on a single 2002 analysis that has never been independently replicated, whose primary publication this case has so far seen only through the 2026 paper's citations (TIK-E007). The original wording is "fragments of ergot" identified as microremains; downstream retellings that "hallucinogenic alkaloids were chemically detected" say more than the record does. Re-analysis with modern methods is TIK-R004.

Rests on a single 2002 analysis known to this ledger only through the 2026 paper's citation (TIK-E007); the primary chapters are unread, the sanctuary attribution rests on an unopened excavation report, and the find has never been re-analyzed. What was identified (microremains, not alkaloids) and against what site background is unknown.

One admitted record (TIK-E007), which carries the 2002 analysis only as cited by the 2026 paper; the primary chapters are unread and the source unverified, the analysis is unreplicated, and the sanctuary attribution rests on an excavation report not opened.

The 2002 archaeological report from Mas Castellar de Pontós documents ergot sclerotium microremains inside a ceremonial vessel and within human dental calculus from a sanctuary associated with Demeter and Kore. The strongest opposing consideration is that this find rests on a single unverified and unreplicated 2002 publication, and fungal microremains in agricultural grain vessels could easily reflect incidental crop contamination rather than intentional psychoactive preparation.

The find is the case's best combination of substance, ingestion evidence, and cultic context, but every route to it is secondhand: the primary 2002 chapters were never obtained, the claim rests on the 2026 paper's citation of them, and the analysis has never been replicated. The strongest opposing consideration is the documented source drift — downstream retellings harden "identified ergot microremains" into "hallucinogenic alkaloids chemically detected," which the primary wording does not support.

TIK-E007 reports ergot fragments in a ceremonial vessel and in dental calculus at a Demeter-and-Kore-associated Iberian sanctuary, directly matching the claim if the report is accurate. The primary 2002 chapters have not been obtained, however, and the analysis has never been independently replicated. That unverified citation chain and the unresolved possibility of incidental cereal-associated ergot are the strongest opposing considerations.

Antonopoulos et al. 2026 cite Juan-Tresserras 2002 for ergot fragments inside a ceremonial vase and in human dental calculus at the Demeter/Kore-linked sanctuary of Mas Castellar de Pontós. That combination of substance, ingestion, and cultic context is the closest archaeological hinge available. The strongest opposing consideration is that the primary 2002 chapters have never been obtained or independently re-analyzed by this ledger, leaving the record second-hand and unreplicated.

The sole evidence is E007, the 2026 paper's summary of Juan-Tresserras 2002 with exact chapter citations: ergot fragments in a ceremonial vase and in a 25-year-old man's dental calculus, within a sanctuary attributed to the two goddesses. The report itself is well attested, but nobody in this ledger has read the primary chapters, the identification method is unknown (R010), the analysis has never been replicated (R004), and two details of the claim, species-level "Claviceps purpurea" and the 4th–2nd century BCE date, are absent from the quoted summary. Strongest opposing consideration: ergot parasitizes cereal (the hypothesis's own premise, E010), so without a site-wide comparison against ordinary grain, ergot in a vessel and a grain-eater's calculus may be background rather than preparation; the later retelling as "hallucinogenic alkaloids detected" is unsupported. For the hypothesis it is analogy, not identity: Catalonia is, if anything, farther from Attica than the ledger's "a thousand kilometers" suggests.

One record (TIK-E007), carried second-hand through the 2026 paper's citation. The 2002 chapters are unread and the analysis has never been replicated. The sanctuary's link to the two goddesses rests on an excavation report that has also not been read. Provisional on citation alone.