The Peking Gazette（邸報 Dibao, also called 邸抄 Dichao, 京報 Jingbao and 京抄 Jingchao）was a daily periodical reporting on the emperor’s movements, edicts and memorials. For bureaucrats and scholars of the Qing Dynasty period, as well as foreign missionaries and diplomats residing in China, it was an important means of grasping the social situation and obtaining information from the central government. Despite its importance, there remain such basic questions as to who edited and published the gazette, and how it was prepared for circulation throughout the country. This article explores these problems in analyzing the characteristics of the dissemination of court news in Qing China.
The regulations established for the Peking Gazette in the Da Qing Huidian 大清会典 regulations were not strictly observed, as the edicts and memorials were collected and copied by metropolitan clerks, and the printing of the gazette was entrusted to commercial publishers during two-thirds of the whole period. In addition, the content of the gazette included not only the official edicts and memorials, but also unofficial political information obtained from palace guards and other personal sources. Therefore, the dissemination of information through the gazette was subjected to a minimum of scrutiny by the Dynasty’s central government, which neither edited or even reviewed the content, nor provided funds for printing, only punishing those responsible for any false reporting after the fact. Rather than describing the gazette as an initiative taken by the central government to publish official governmental affairs, it would be better to characterize the missive as an opportunity on the part of clerks and merchants to profit from the thirst of local officials and scholars for central government information with the government’s tacit approval.
By the end of the 19th century, the central government’s passive attitude towards the dissemination of information was unable to adapt to the new demands of modernization, leading to the release of the Zhengzhi Guanbao 政治官報（renaming it Neige Guanbao 内閣官報 in 1911）, defining the journal as “ the official organ of law and order” , thus clearly distinguishing it from the Peking Gazette both at the level of policy intent and that of distribution and circulation.

View full abstract

The aim of this study is to present a detailed picture of the personal networks of British army officers in the later eighteenth century. By exploring the military records of John Peebles, John Enys and Thomas Hughes, all of whom served as junior officers during the 1770s and 1780s, the study shows that they formed extensive relationships with people both within and outside the military and examines their active, and sometimes long-lasting, interactions.
Within the army, officers built strong ties with their colleagues through various kinds of shared experience, both on and off duty. Not only did they fight together on the battlefield, but they closely collaborated in a number of peacetime duties, such as drilling, policing and ceremonial activities. In their leisure time, too, they gathered at the mess, shared accommodations and enjoyed a variety of entertainments together. These social gatherings were often attended by the officers’ families, causing their relationships to naturally grow very close and intimate. In some cases, personal connections were formed between officers and their men. Despite the fact that the two groups were separated by a strict military hierarchy, there were numerous instances where officers had close contact with the ranks, especially those who worked as their clerks and servants.
Officers’ personal networks were not confined to the military, for during the period in question, it was common for soldiers to be stationed among the civilian population, making civilian/military contact ubiquitous. Indeed, active social intercourse was seen everywhere - at pubs shops, churches, public ceremonies and private pastimes.
Thus, British army officers (and their families) in the later eighteenth century connected themselves with a remarkably broad range of people. Their relationships extended the regimental, officer/private and civilian/military boundaries. And as far as can be judged from the sources examined, these cross-boundary networks greatly helped to maintain the internal order of the army, and to secure peace and amity between the military and civilian society.

View full abstract