the excavation of the athenian agora twelfth season: 1947

168 HOMER A. THOMPSON
and the cross
w7all
consist simply of a single row of large poros blocks set on edge;
of the upper wall nothing survTives. Traces of lighter interior walls indicate the
existence of small rooms, perhaps two series of five each separated by a corridor,
in the northern part. The earth floor of the large south room slopes gently up from
west to east, suggesting an auditorium. Toward the southwest angle of the southern
room appeared a corner of rubble stone masonry covered on its outer face with red
stucco of good qualitv; the associated floor level indicates that this may be part of the
original construction. It would seem to be a remnant of a pedestal or bench.
A date in the second half of the fifth century is given by the pottery from beneath
the floor level of the enclosure, by the material and by the workmanship of its foundations.
From the plan (Fig. 6) it is clear that the enclosure was already in existence
when the Great Drain was built in the early fourth century; the drain closely parallels
the west side of the enclosure throughout its length but bends immediately on passing
its northwest corner.
Conclusive evidence for the identification of the enclosure is still wanting. From
its position, its size, and obviously public character, however, one might hazard the
guess that it accommodated one or other of the law-courts that are known to have
stood near the Agora. Some slight confirmation may be derived from the discovery
of five of the characteristic wheel-shaped dikasts' ballots in this general area (P1.
46, 4). It may be observed too that the newly found enclosure has much in common
with the so-called " Greek Building " to the southwest of the Tholos; a number of
dikasts' ballots have also been found in the immediate vicinity of that structure, not
to mention the clepsydra or water clock of the type used in law courts which was
recovered from a well of the late fifth century B.C. immediately to the east.20 It must
be emphasized, however, that both these identifications are still very tentative and
that certainty can be hoped for only through the complete exploration and study of
the areas in question.21
Whatever the orig,inal function of the enclosure. it would seem to have shared
the devastation that all this district suffered from Sulla's soldiery in 86 B.C. The; area
was subsequently overlaid by one or nmore complexes of small rooms set about court-
20 Hesperia, VIII, 1939, pp. 274 ff.
21 The site of the newly found enclosure would correspond to the lower of the two referred to
in Bekker, Anecd. gr., I, 253: E-1ra-vo 8KaciTTrTpLOV Kat V7rOKaTO) *7Travo uEV tKaWITTVptOV TO Ev 'ApEtqo rayw
ELTTt yap EV vaiEv X o'0)- KaTO 8\ TO EV KOtX(t0 TtV\ T'ro'. It is reminiscent also of the entertaining incident
that befell Sokrates' disciples as recorded in Plutarch, de Genio Socratis, X (580 E-F): 7ropEvopE'voW
S' avTOts &W Tr6)v sptoyXv'4wv 7rapp Ta &iKamT'pta, OE- araavTomrtv aOpoct /3op/3'pov 71Ept71AEctU K0t Kar JXXrXow
cOov'uEvat ta\ 70XiOos EKTpO1r7js 8E yr\ 7rapov'rin TOV\S ,E\V avcTrpEcav 4jl3aXov3aa, Tov\ 8' avqio'Xvvov. As we
shall see below (p. 172) there is good evidence for the activity of marble workers immediately to
the south of the enclosure in the time of Sokrates. On the law-courts see Hommel, " Heliaia,"
Philologuts, Supplementband XIX, Heft II, 1927; Dow, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology,
L, 1939, pp. 18 ff.