Scaife ATLAS

CTS Library / Against Agoratus

Against Agoratus (76-77)

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0540.tlg013.perseus-eng2:76-77
Refs {'start': {'reference': '76', 'human_reference': 'None 76'}, 'end': {'reference': '77', 'human_reference': 'None 77'}}
Ancestors []
Children []
prev
plain textXML
next

Hence, if he asserts that he killed Phrynichus, remember my words and take vengeance on this man for what he has done: if he disclaims it, ask him on what grounds he alleges that he was made an Athenian. If he fails to prove it, punish him for making use of his assumed title of Athenian to sit in both law-court and Assembly, and to bring slanderous charges against so many persons.

I am told that he is concocting for his defence the plea that he went off to Phyle, and was in the party that returned from Phyle, and that this is the mainstay of his case. But the facts were as I shall relate. This man did go to Phyle; yet, could there be an example of more abject vileness? For he knew that at Phyle there were some of those who had been banished by him, and he had the face to approach them!

Tokens

Hence 1 w 5
if 1 w 8
he 1 w 10
asserts 1 w 17
that 1 w 21
he 2 w 23
killed 1 w 29
Phrynichus 1 w 39
remember 1 w 48
my 1 w 50
words 1 w 55
and 1 w 58
take 1 w 62
vengeance 1 w 71
on 1 w 73
this 1 w 77
man 1 w 80
for 1 w 83
what 1 w 87
he 3 w 89
has 1 w 92
done 1 w 96
if 2 w 99
he 4 w 101
disclaims 1 w 110
it 1 w 112
ask 1 w 116
him 1 w 119
on 3 w 121
what 2 w 125
grounds 1 w 132
he 5 w 134
alleges 1 w 141
that 2 w 145
he 6 w 147
was 1 w 150
made 1 w 154
an 4 w 156
Athenian 1 w 164
If 1 w 167
he 8 w 169
fails 1 w 174
to 1 w 176
prove 1 w 181
it 2 w 183
punish 1 w 190
him 2 w 193
for 2 w 196
making 1 w 202
use 1 w 205
of 1 w 207
his 2 w 210
assumed 1 w 217
title 1 w 222
of 2 w 224
Athenian 2 w 232
to 2 w 234
sit 1 w 237
in 2 w 239
both 1 w 243
law-court 1 w 252
and 2 w 255
Assembly 1 w 263
and 3 w 267
to 3 w 269
bring 1 w 274
slanderous 1 w 284
charges 1 w 291
against 1 w 298
so 1 w 300
many 1 w 304
persons 1 w 311
I 2 w 313
am 1 w 315
told 1 w 319
that 3 w 323
he 10 w 325
is 5 w 327
concocting 1 w 337
for 3 w 340
his 3 w 343
defence 1 w 350
the 3 w 353
plea 1 w 357
that 4 w 361
he 12 w 363
went 1 w 367
off 1 w 370
to 5 w 372
Phyle 1 w 377
and 5 w 381
was 2 w 384
in 6 w 386
the 4 w 389
party 1 w 394
that 5 w 398
returned 1 w 406
from 1 w 410
Phyle 2 w 415
and 6 w 419
that 6 w 423
this 2 w 427
is 8 w 429
the 5 w 432
mainstay 1 w 440
of 4 w 442
his 5 w 445
case 1 w 449
But 1 w 453
the 6 w 456
facts 1 w 461
were 1 w 465
as 8 w 467
I 3 w 468
shall 1 w 473
relate 1 w 479
This 1 w 484
man 3 w 487
did 1 w 490
go 1 w 492
to 6 w 494
Phyle 3 w 499
yet 1 w 503
could 1 w 509
there 1 w 514
be 2 w 516
an 14 w 518
example 1 w 525
of 5 w 527
more 1 w 531
abject 1 w 537
vileness 1 w 545
For 1 w 549
he 17 w 551
knew 1 w 555
that 7 w 559
at 11 w 561
Phyle 4 w 566
there 2 w 571
were 2 w 575
some 1 w 579
of 6 w 581
those 1 w 586
who 1 w 589
had 1 w 592
been 1 w 596
banished 1 w 604
by 1 w 606
him 3 w 609
and 7 w 613
he 20 w 615
had 2 w 618
the 9 w 621
face 1 w 625
to 7 w 627
approach 1 w 635
them 1 w 639