James Legge (1815–1897) is primarily remembered todayas the heroic translator of the Chinese Classics(1861–1872, 1893–1895). Allowing for changes instylistic taste, these massive translations arestill considered the “standard” versions of worksthat “classically” and “scripturally” defined aso-called Confucian “great tradition” in China.Unfortunately a fixation on this singular scholarlyaccomplishment has tended to brand Legge as merely agreat, though plodding, translator – someoneprimarily remarkable for his indefatigable habits ofworking. Certainly it was often felt that hiscontributions to the emergent SinologicalOrientalism of the nineteenth century in no waymatched the achievements of the great Parisianacademicians (Abel Rémusat and Stanislas Julien);nor was he seen as a particularly significant figurein any other aspect of British tradition in thenineteenth century. Even worse, and seeming to makehim a fit candidate for Lytton Strachey's debunkingcriticism of all insufferably righteous Victorianparagons of virtue, was that his identity as asinologist and scholar was forever tainted by hisoriginal vocation as a Congregationalist missionaryagent for the London Missionary Society.