[
    {
        "id": 212265,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1990",
        "page_number": 207,
        "title": "RAS-1990",
        "content_text": "184\n\nof fact, focusing on the negative comments made by Legge without balancing them by Legge's sensitivity to broader ethical and religious contexts. Furthermore, Kranz showed none of Legge's sensitivity to the values of Chinese cultural and ethical standards; all of his comments were marred by a crass condescension.\n\nThis attempt to discredit Confucius and Legge's interpretation of Confucius went without criticism for only a few years. In 1904, another author in the The Chinese Recorder noted that Kranz had employed for his purposes only the earlier (1861) edition of Legge's work. He was apparently unaware of Legge's positive re-evaluation of Confucius which had appeared in his second (1893-1895) edition.\n\nV. Unintentional Imbalance\n\nIf the judgements of strangers are too often insensitive, the justifications of relatives are sometimes too sensitive. Pastor Kranz's distortions were drawn from general and personal ignorance; Helen Legge's biography, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar, was a self-conscious piece, full of personal insights and general awareness of her subject's interests and intentions, but somewhat unbalanced.\n\nHelen Legge was commissioned by the Religious Tract Society to write the biography. James Legge's career and professional life could be neatly divided: thirty-five years were spent in the service of the London Missionary Society; twenty-one years were devoted to his academic work in Oxford. Although his Christian concerns and his Chinese interests were consistent throughout his professional life, the institutional change marked a watershed in the direction and character of his efforts. Nevertheless, in Helen's biography, thirteen of fourteen chapters dealt with her father's missionary life! This may well have been the preference of the publisher, but, even though Helen interspersed some notes on her father's academic career, far too little of the scholar appears in the book.\n\nThis unbalanced presentation was redressed twenty years later. One of Legge's students became the third Professor of Chinese Language and Literature at Oxford. William Edward Soothill prefaced his book on Chinese Religions with a dedication which read: “To James Legge, a Great Scholar and a Devoted Missionary”\n\nJ\n\n1136",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212292,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1990",
        "page_number": 234,
        "title": "RAS-1990",
        "content_text": "211\n\n11\n\nCritical positions in this debate are found in the following articles: Herbet A. Giles, **The Remains of Lao-tzu**, China Review 14 (1885-1886), pp. 231-281, with replies to Legge in China Review, 16 (1887-1888). pp. 238-241 and 17 (1888-1889), pp. 299-300; T. W. Kingsmill in articles in ibid., 17 (1889-1890), pp. 305-310 and 23 (1898-99), pp. 265-270. Legge's own work and response appears in ibid., 16 (1888-1889), pp. 195-214, and \"The Tao Teh King\", The British Quarterly Review (July 1883), pp. 41-59.\n\n12\n\nRecent editions of The Four Books in the Chinese Classics include critical notes of translation errors by Arthur Waley. (Originally from \"Notes on Mencius\", first published in Asia Major ns 1:1 (1949), pp. 99-108.) A Taiwanese scholar has also published some helpful corrections of translation errors in Legge's Analects, but has many times included as errors the same kind of criticisms which Kühnert had made: preferring Zhu Xi's renderings to Legge's, even when Legge's disagreements with Zhu Xi were justified. See Yen Chen-ying, (MHkk) Li Ya-ko shih Ying-shih Lun-yu chin yen-chiuZU (A Study of the English Translation of the [Analects] by James Legge) (Taipei: Commercial Press, 1971). A more recent study of Zhu Xi's interpretation of The Great Learning includes some criticism of Legge's position, cf. Daniel K. Gardner, Chu Hsi and the Ta-hsüeh: Neo-Confucian Reflection on the Confucian Canon (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1986), esp. p. 107.\n\n27\n\nKranz, Pastor P, ed, \"Some of Professor J. Legge's Criticisms on Confucianism\", The Chinese Recorder 29 (June 1898), pp. 273-282; (July 1898), pp. 341-343; (August 1898), pp. 380-388; (September 1898), pp. 440-445.\n\n24\n\nCf \"Professor J. Legge's Change of Views concerning Confucius\". The Chinese Recorder 35:2 (February 1904), pp. 93 ff. “Some New Dimensions in the Study of the Works of James Legge (1815-1897): Part II', Sino-Western Cultural Relations Journal XIII (1991), pp. 33-46.\n\n25\n\nHelen Legge, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar (London: Religious Tract Society. 1905).\n\n34\n\nSoothill, W. E. The Three Religions of China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1923). Lindsay Ride tells how a group of sinologists, meeting in Oxford at the Orientalist Congress of 1928, visited the gravesite of the Legge family, leaving a wreath with a card proclaiming: \"To the immortal genius of the great master, James Legge, from the sinologists assembled at the 17th Congress of Orientalists at Oxford, August 31st, 1928\"*. Ride provides no source for this information.\n\n17\n\nRide, op. cit., p.10.\n\n28\n\nCf. The Famine in China (no publisher's details, 1878). Oxford University Gazette 1876-77, pp. 309, 368; 1879-80, p. 421. The Religions of China: Confucianism and Taoism described and compared with Christianity (Spring Lecture of the Presbyterian Church of England for 1880, delivered in the College, Guilford Street, London) (London: Hodder and Stoughton 1880); Christianity and Confucianism compared in their teaching on the Whole Duty of Man (London: Religious Tract Society, 1883); also Christianity in China: A Rendering of the Nestorian Tablet at Si-An-Fu to Commemorate Christianity (London: Trübner and Co. 1888).\n\nZV\n\nStein's study appears as an introduction to the re-publication of a translation of The Four Books by David Collie. William Bysshe Stein, ed., David Collie, trans. The Chinese Classical Work Commonly Called The Four Books (Gainesville, Florida: 1970, reprint Malacca 1828), Introduction. I have chosen Stein's comments as an example because it is relevant to the understanding of Legge's efforts. Collie began teaching at the Anglo-Chinese College in Malacca in 1824, produced a translation of most of The Four Books, and died four years later while in Malacca. Although Legge never met Collie, he did discover his work and studied it carefully during his first years in Malacca and Hong",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214907,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2000",
        "page_number": 3,
        "title": "RAS-2000",
        "content_text": "ADDENDUM\n\nNicholas Tapp's 2000 Barbara Ward Lecture reproduced in Vol. 39 of the Journal was inadequately sourced. It was as follows: The Barbara Ward Memorial Lecture, given annually to the Hong Kong Anthropological Society on 17 October 2000, at the Museum of History, Kowloon.\n\nERRATA\n\nTHE BATTLE OF HONG KONG, Vol. 39\n\np. 115, second para.: 'just clause' in the second last sentence should read 'just cause.'\n\np. 117, last para.: the word 'the' before 'Grasett's contribution' should be omitted.\n\np. 118, second line of the quotation from Stokes: ‘again Germany' should read 'against Germany.'\n\nThere are a few endnote reference numbers which have been rendered in text rather than superscript: note 11 (Before Bell' on p. 121) note 21 on p. 127\n\nThe reference to 'Keniti' in the second last para. of p. 128 should read 'Takagi Keniti.'\n\nTHE CHARACTERISTICS OF CHINESE RELIGION, Vol. 39\n\nIn Note 13, the book in question, Moral Tenets and Customs in China is by Dr. L. Wieger, with texts in Chinese translated and annotated by L. Davrout, S.J.\n\nIn note 14, the word 'Refs' should be omitted.\n\nIn note 19, Professor Soothill's book is entitled A Mission in China (Edinburgh and London, Oliphant, Anderson and Ferrier, 1907). In note 24, read 'Moule' for 'Moulem.'\n\nii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n",
        "rank": 0
    }
]