[HuShifang]

For context, he is reasonably well known -- probably the third most-prominent of the early Confucians (albeit a distant third, after Confucius and Mencius), with partial and complete English translations. But, he was often regarded by Confucians throughout Chinese history warily, because of certain "Legalist" tendencies (which, to put it crudely, were more authoritarian and Machiavellian as well as more legalistic), which were frequently disparaged (but quietly drawn on by pragmatic "statecraft" thinkers). Especially because two of his students, Han Fei and Li Si, were arguably the most (in)famous legalists.

That said, I had a teacher years ago from Taiwan who argued that 1) Xunzi was the first full-blown "philosopher" (in the Western sense of offering an epistemology etc and arguing in a logically reasoned way) in Chinese history, and that 2) Xunzi and Zhuangzi were the smartest Chinese thinkers of all time. Years later, I'm not sure she was wrong.

[hmm37]

I would actually say that for Confucians, it's Confucius, Mencius then Zhu Xi. Xunzi comes 4th, and was regarded a bit heterodox.

[HuShifang]

Yes, but as I said, I was talking about early Confucians.

[hmm37]

Oh. I missed that. In that case wouldn't Confucius grandson (子思) be higher up? After all he supposedly taught Mencius and wrote the Doctrine of the Mean 中庸, and that work is considered standard reading, while reading Xunzi would have been probably only read when you're already a scholar and mastered pretty much everything else.

That said, perhaps the Doctrine of the Mean wasn't considered all that important despite being part of the Book of Rites (礼记), or rather it wasn't considered prominent until around the Song dynasty.