Scaife ATLAS

CTS Library / On the Olive Stump

On the Olive Stump (11)

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0540.tlg007.perseus-eng2:11
Refs {'start': {'reference': '11', 'human_reference': 'None 11'}}
Ancestors []
Children []
prev
plain textXML
next

Witnesses

Well now, since the termination of that time I have cultivated it myself. My accuser says that in the archonship of Souniades[*] an olive-stump was uprooted by me. And the previous cultivators, who rented it from me for a number of years, have testified to you that there was no stump on the plot. I ask you, how could one convict the accuser more patently of lying? For it is not possible that the cultivator who came after cleared away what was not there before.

Tokens

Witnesses 1 w 9
Well 1 w 13
now 1 w 16
since 1 w 22
the 1 w 25
termination 1 w 36
of 1 w 38
that 1 w 42
time 1 w 46
I 1 w 47
have 1 w 51
cultivated 1 w 61
it 2 w 63
myself 1 w 69
My 1 w 72
accuser 1 w 79
says 1 w 83
that 2 w 87
in 3 w 89
the 2 w 92
archonship 1 w 102
of 2 w 104
Souniades 1 w 113
397 1 w 116
396 1 w 120
B 1 w 121
C 1 w 123
an 1 w 126
olive-stump 1 w 137
was 1 w 140
uprooted 1 w 148
by 1 w 150
me 2 w 152
And 1 w 156
the 3 w 159
previous 1 w 167
cultivators 1 w 178
who 1 w 182
rented 1 w 188
it 3 w 190
from 1 w 194
me 3 w 196
for 1 w 199
a 13 w 200
number 1 w 206
of 3 w 208
years 1 w 213
have 2 w 218
testified 1 w 227
to 2 w 229
you 1 w 232
that 3 w 236
there 1 w 241
was 2 w 244
no 2 w 246
stump 2 w 251
on 3 w 253
the 5 w 256
plot 1 w 260
I 2 w 262
ask 1 w 265
you 2 w 268
how 1 w 272
could 1 w 277
one 1 w 280
convict 1 w 287
the 6 w 290
accuser 2 w 297
more 1 w 301
patently 1 w 309
of 4 w 311
lying 1 w 316
For 1 w 320
it 4 w 322
is 1 w 324
not 1 w 327
possible 1 w 335
that 4 w 339
the 7 w 342
cultivator 2 w 352
who 2 w 355
came 1 w 359
after 1 w 364
cleared 1 w 371
away 1 w 375
what 1 w 379
was 3 w 382
not 2 w 385
there 2 w 390
before 1 w 396