Most areas of the Kadmeia show evidence of domestic and mortuary use in Middle Helladic times; the north and northeast slopes of Ag. Andreas - thereafter 'Ag. Andreas' (Demakopoulou 1976a; 1979a, c; Aravantinos 1981; 1982a); the area east of Pouros (Spyropoulos 1970b; 1971a, b; Spyropoulos and Chadwick 1975) and southeast of Pouros (Touloupa et al. 1966b, c; Paraklas 1968b; Demakopoulou 1975a; Aravantinos 1982c; Andrikou 1994); the ridge over the east and south slopes (Touloupa et al. 1965b; Paraklas 1968c; Symeonoglou 1973; Demakopoulou 1975b; 1976b; loannidou 1973) and the slopes themselves (Touloupa et al. 1964; 1965a, c; Spyropoulos 1969a; 1971c; Demakopoulou 1979b; 1980; Sampson 1980; Aravantinos 1982b; 1994a, b; Andrikou 1993). A series of neighbouring plots along the northwest slope, above Gouma, have also preserved substantial evidence of Middle Helladic use (Touloupa et al. 1966a; Spyropoulos 1969b; 1970a; Demakopoulou 1973-4b).
Even fhe precipitous west part of the Kadmeia (Touloupa et al. 1966d) and the foothills within the area bound by the rivers, to northwest, northeast and southeast, were occupied (Paraklas 1968a; Demakopoulou 1973-4e; 1975c; 1978; Sampson 1981; Aravantinos 1983; Piteros 1983). Moreover, the excavations west of the museum have recently demonstrated that this area was used as a burial site
Figure 7.1 Topographical map of Thebes (based on Symeonoglou 1985). A. Ag. Andreas, B. Pouros tou Kavallari, C. Area east of Pouros (including the levelled House of Kadmos hill-top), D, NW slope, E. NW foothill (Gourna area), F, Museum area, G. Towards Ampheion knoll, H. Towards Kastellia, I. East foothill, J. East slope, K. East ridge, L. SE slope, M. Area S/SE of Pouros, N. Towards Ismenion, O. Towards Kolonaki-Ayia Anna. ’
(Aravantinos, pers. comm.). Previously, it was generally assumed that the entire north part of the Kadmeia was not used in this period. Although the new excavations demonstrate that this was not the case, it is striking that a single plot with Middle Helladic remains has been reported within the central block defined by Pindarou, Oidipodos, Epameinondou and Antigonis streets (Spyropoulos 1970b). Another lacuna in the southwest sector of the modem grid, i. e. south of Oidipodos and west of Epameinondou street, may reflect a steep extremity of the prehistoric Kadmeia. Very few prehistoric deposits have been reported there.
On the basis of domestic remains mainly, the extent of the settlement has been estimated to reach 8 ha (Symeonoglou 1985). This approximation rests on the assumption of a fortification, though, no trace of which has survived (see below). An updated distribution of REU's with domestic remains points to a higher figure, perhaps around 20 ha. This does not include more peripheral areas, for example the museum site and the northwest and east foothills; in addition, we should allow for the possibility that isolated dwellings existed beyond the Kadmeia, as a single, child burial near Kastellia might suggest (Demakopoulou 1973-4d).
If the distribution of excavated remains hints at the spread, it does not reveal much about the density of the settlement. A rough approximation of relative densities in various areas could be arrived at by examining differences in the number of REU's with Middle Helladic remains throughout the Kadmeia (percentages of overall REU's in each area, regardless of presence or date of finds). But we need to draw a distinction between areas representing a larger sample of excavated space on one hand (average overall REU=15.5 per area; Ag Andreas, southeast slope, the areas southeast, south and east of Pouros, the east and northwest slopes) and not so well sampled areas on the other (average overall REU=5.5 per area).
The uneven sampling of the Kadmeia prevents us from comparing frequencies of plots with Middle Helladic remains across these two categories. However, it allows us to make some inferences about the frequencies of plots with Middle Helladic remains within each category, in this case the relatively well-sampled areas. Definitive conclusions are, of course, contingent on actual densities of remains within individual plots. Let us focus on the areas where archaeological exploration has been more systematic (average overall REU=15.5 per area). Almost 60% of excavated plots along the central east slope of the Kadmeia have preserved Middle Helladic remains (Figure 7.2). Further, nearly 40% of REU's in Ag. Andreas and south/southeast of Pouros and 30% of excavated plots east of Pouros, at the east ridge and the east foothill have produced evidence for Middle Helladic use. About 20% of excavation units at the southeast and northwest slope, finally, have produced such evidence. I am not trying to suggest that these decreasing figures correspond exactly with the density of the Middle Helladic settlement in the given areas. The possibility of a very uneven preservation of sites by area should not be ultimately excluded but it is feasible that the highest percentages at the east slope, Ag. Andreas and south / southeast of Pouros reflect a denser occupation there.
I would like to proceed to an examination of types of use (domestic or mortuary) on the Middle Helladic Kadmeia, since this can enhance the resolution of the picture I have so far portrayed.
World History
