Show simple item record

dc.creatorBingenheimer, Marcus
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-25T15:45:02Z
dc.date.available2020-04-25T15:45:02Z
dc.date.issued2018-12
dc.identifier.citationBingenheimer, M. (2018). "Who was 'Central' in the History of Chinese Buddhism?: A Social Network Approach." International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture, 28(2): 47-67. https://doi.org/10.16893/IJBTC.2018.12.28.2.45
dc.identifier.issn1598-7914
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/144
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/157
dc.description.abstractHidden in the Buddhist biographical literature on eminent monks is a large amount of information about who knew whom. It is especially rich for the time between 300 and 1000 CE, when the four major collections of “Biographies of Eminent Monks” (gaoseng zhuan) allow us to date and locate the relationships of individuals to a degree unimaginable for the religious history of Europe or India in that period. Using open data from the Gaoseng Zhuan projects conducted between 2007 and 2012 at Dharma Drum Mountain, Taiwan, this article applies centrality measures to identify key players in the currently available data. The dataset connects actors with places and other actors; often connections can be dated. The version of the large, undirected network used here contains ca. 6,500 actors and ca. 13,000 links. The largest component contains ca. 5,500 actors connected by ca. 10,000 links. Comparing the set of key players based on Degree Centrality with those indicated by Betweenness Centrality, a meaningful constellation appears. Degree based centrality yields a list of translators and important patrons. Translation teams constitute cliques that contribute to the high degree value of their leader. Imperial patrons interface with monastic leaders as well as with the secular domain, moreover, records of such interactions are privileged in the sources. Betweenness Centrality, on the other hand, yields famous Chan masters of the late Tang and early Song Dynasty. This reflects both the rising importance of the lineage paradigm in Chinese Buddhist historiography as well as the seminal position of these figures between earlier and later forms of Chinese Buddhism.
dc.format.extent23 pages
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofFaculty/ Researcher Works
dc.relation.haspartInternational Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture, Vol. 28, No. 2
dc.relation.isreferencedbyAcademy of Buddhist Studies, Dongguk University, Korea
dc.rightsAll Rights Reserved
dc.subjectHistorical social network analysis
dc.subjectGaoseng zhuan 高僧傳
dc.subjectLiterature
dc.subjectCentrality measures
dc.subjectChinese Buddhism
dc.subjectBiographies of monks and nuns
dc.titleWho was “Central” in the History of Chinese Buddhism?: A Social Network Approach
dc.typeText
dc.type.genreJournal article
dc.description.departmentReligion
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.16893/IJBTC.2018.12.28.2.45
dc.ada.noteFor Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
dc.description.schoolcollegeTemple University. College of Liberal Arts
dc.creator.orcid0000-0002-9102-9217
dc.temple.creatorBingenheimer, Marcus
refterms.dateFOA2020-04-25T15:45:02Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Bingenheimer-JournalArticle-20 ...
Size:
945.8Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record