Making Time for the Past 2008
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199291083.003.0007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Epilogue

Abstract: This chapter stresses the significance of time not only to professional chronographers and historians, but also to the polis. Articulating and expressing time effectively and plausibly, particularly in local history, mattered. The historian, the orator, or the artist used the same frameworks as the chronographers but to serve the polis; he linked the formal manipulation of time and the life of the city. Tragic and comic dramatists, orators, native and visiting historians, rhapsodes, exegetae, and statesmen all… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Clarke & Pringle (2006) and Tilling et al (2008), the upper bound of the Lacc-L * correlation (Lacc ∼ L * ) is the consequence of sample selection effects; the luminosity of most stars above that limit is dominated by accretion and these objects are in a younger, embedded phase without an optically visible photosphere. The lower bound (Lacc ∼ 0.01L * , mainly for objects with L * > L⊙) is limited by accretion detection thresholds (symbols with vertical bars in Fig.…”
Section: The Lacc -L * Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…According to Clarke & Pringle (2006) and Tilling et al (2008), the upper bound of the Lacc-L * correlation (Lacc ∼ L * ) is the consequence of sample selection effects; the luminosity of most stars above that limit is dominated by accretion and these objects are in a younger, embedded phase without an optically visible photosphere. The lower bound (Lacc ∼ 0.01L * , mainly for objects with L * > L⊙) is limited by accretion detection thresholds (symbols with vertical bars in Fig.…”
Section: The Lacc -L * Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Lacc-L * correlation extends over ∼ 10 orders of magnitude in Lacc, and ∼ 7 orders of magnitude in L * , covering all optically visible young stars from the substellar to the HAeBe regime (see e.g. Natta et al 2006;Clarke & Pringle 2006;Tilling et al 2008;Mendigutía et al 2011;Fairlamb et al 2015, and references therein). Based on a statistical analysis, Mendigutía et al (2011) tentatively suggested that the correlation between the accretion luminosity and the luminosity of several emission lines in HAeBe stars could be driven by the common dependence of both luminosities on the stellar luminosity.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The columns of material accreting onto a young star also emit hydrogen emission lines that are significantly stronger and broader than those from stellar chromospheres, offering an additional tracer of accretion. Because Hα is more easily observed in brown dwarfs than UV emission, line profiles of Hα provided the first evidence of accretion for young low-mass objects gested that this apparent correlation may be largely due to selection effects (Clarke & Pringle 2006). If a dependence on stellar mass is present, its origin is unclear (Hartmann et al 2006, Vorobyov & Basu 2009).…”
Section: Circumstellar Disksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the detection limits and the difficulty of measuring very smallṀ do not allow us to rule out detection/selection thresholds as responsible for this trend (see e.g. Clarke & Pringle 2006). Moreover, the spread of theṀ data exceeds 2 dex at any given age.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%