Puyi

Puyi (7 February 1906–17 October 1967) was the last emperor of the Qing dynasty and is commonly known as the last emperor of China. A member of the Manchu Aisin-Gioro imperial family, he ascended the throne in 1908 while still a toddler. His abdication on 12 February 1912 followed the Xinhai Revolution and ended Qing imperial government, although he retained his imperial title and a household within the Forbidden City until 1924. He was briefly restored to the throne in July 1917. (en.wikipedia.org)

Puyi subsequently became chief executive of Manchukuo in 1932 and its emperor in 1934, ruling nominally over a Japanese-controlled state in northeastern China until 1945. Captured by Soviet forces at the end of World War II, he testified at the Tokyo war-crimes tribunal before being transferred to Chinese custody in 1950. Following his pardon in 1959, he lived in Beijing and worked on historical materials. His life connects the collapse of imperial rule, Japanese expansion in China, and the political transformations of the twentieth century; his autobiography and later screen portrayals also shaped public knowledge of these events. (en.chinaculture.org)

Imperial ancestry, names, and accession

Puyi was born on 7 February 1906 at the Prince Chun residence near Shichahai in Beijing. He was a Manchu of the Aisin-Gioro imperial lineage, the ruling house of the Qing dynasty. His father, Zaifeng, held the hereditary title Prince Chun; his mother, Youlan, belonged to the Gūwalgiya clan and was the daughter of the senior official Ronglu. Puyi was their eldest son. His paternal grandfather, Yixuan, the first Prince Chun, was a son of the Daoguang emperor, placing him within a close collateral branch of the imperial family rather than among the reigning emperor’s direct descendants. (dpm.org.cn)

The Guangxu emperor was Zaifeng’s elder half-brother and therefore Puyi’s paternal uncle. Guangxu had no surviving son, so succession required the selection of a child from another branch of the dynasty. Empress Dowager Cixi chose Puyi as Guangxu lay dying in November 1908. The arrangement involved more than replacing one sovereign with another: the succession decree made Puyi the adopted heir of the earlier Tongzhi emperor while also continuing Guangxu’s ancestral line. This dual position addressed the ritual obligations of two childless emperors, distinguishing biological descent from the relationships created through imperial adoption and ancestral worship. (dpm.org.cn)

Guangxu died on 14 November 1908, and Cixi died the following day. Puyi’s formal enthronement took place on 2 December in the Hall of Supreme Harmony in the Forbidden City, when he was two years and nine months old by Western age reckoning, or three under the traditional Chinese system. Zaifeng had been appointed prince regent, separating the child’s possession of the imperial title from the exercise of governmental authority. The ceremony established Puyi as the Qing sovereign, but the new reign era did not begin immediately: the remaining weeks of the lunar year retained the Guangxu designation, and the following year, 1909, became Xuantong 1. (en.wikipedia.org)

“Puyi” is his personal name, written 溥儀 in traditional Chinese and 溥仪 in simplified Chinese; Aisin-Gioro is his clan name. In modern pinyin the personal name is Pǔyí, while older English-language works commonly use P’u-i, Pu Yi, or Pu-yi. Xuantong (宣統), also encountered as Hsüan-t’ung, was instead a reign-era name, used to identify and date his Qing reign. Kangde (康德), often rendered K’ang-te or Kang Te, belonged to his later emperorship in Manchukuo, from 1934 to 1945, and was not a replacement personal name. He also adopted the English name Henry in connection with his English-language studies under the Scottish tutor Reginald Johnston, producing the familiar designation “Henry Pu Yi”; Henry had no role in his Qing imperial titulature. (en.wikipedia.org)

The child emperor and the fall of the Qing, 1908–1912

Puyi’s reign as Xuantong began in 1908, but executive authority rested with adults governing in his name. His father, Zaifeng, Prince Chun, served as prince regent: the child occupied the ceremonial centre of the Qing monarchy, while the regent and senior officials determined appointments, military policy, and the response to political opposition. Zaifeng dismissed Yuan Shikai in January 1909 and sought to strengthen imperial control through Manchu princes and officials. The creation of an imperial-family-dominated cabinet in 1911 further alienated constitutionalists who wanted a government accountable to representative institutions. These were decisions of the regency, not policies independently formulated by Puyi. (dpm.org.cn)

The Wuchang Uprising of 10 October 1911 transformed the court’s political difficulties into a struggle for survival. The revolt spread beyond Hubei as provincial military and civilian leaders joined the 1911 Revolution. Qing forces nevertheless recovered Hankou on 1 November and Hanyang on 27 November; military collapse was neither immediate nor complete. The court recalled Yuan because of his influence over the Beiyang forces and appointed him prime minister. His return made the dynasty dependent on a commander whom the regency had previously removed. (uw.manifoldapp.org)

Yuan progressively displaced the court as the centre of government. On 22 November 1911, he secured authority to handle most state business through his cabinet rather than through the throne. Zaifeng resigned the regency on 6 December. Empress Dowager Longyu then conducted court affairs on Puyi’s behalf, although no new prince regent was appointed. Her authority concerned the dynasty’s response to the crisis; effective military and ministerial power increasingly belonged to Yuan. (uw.manifoldapp.org)

The establishment of a republican government at Nanjing on 1 January 1912 did not itself remove Puyi: for several weeks, rival republican and imperial governments coexisted. Sun Yat-sen and the revolutionaries offered Yuan the provisional presidency if he secured the Qing abdication. Yuan consequently negotiated with the republicans while pressing the imperial household to surrender political power. Beiyang generals added military pressure by demanding acceptance of a republic. On 3 February, Longyu authorized Yuan to negotiate the abdication terms; the Nanjing Provisional Senate approved the favorable-treatment agreement on 6 February. (chiculture.org.hk)

On 12 February 1912, Longyu issued the abdication on behalf of the six-year-old emperor. The accompanying Articles of Favorable Treatment separated the termination of Qing government from the preservation of the former sovereign’s rank and household. Puyi retained his imperial title and was to receive the ceremonial courtesies accorded to foreign monarchs, together with an annual subsidy of four million silver taels, convertible to four million dollars after currency reform. He could remain temporarily in the Forbidden City before moving to the Summer Palace. The agreement protected his private property, maintained imperial ancestral and funerary observances, and allowed existing palace personnel to remain, while prohibiting further recruitment of eunuchs. Crucially, the imperial guard corps passed under the republican army ministry: continued court ceremony and household privileges did not constitute continued governing sovereignty. (ibiblio.org)

The retained court and the restoration of 1917

After his abdication in February 1912, Puyi remained an emperor within his household but no longer governed China. The Articles of Favorable Treatment preserved his imperial title and required the republic to accord him the courtesies extended to foreign monarchs. They promised an annual allowance of four million silver taels, to become four million yuan after currency reform, and permitted temporary residence in the Forbidden City before an eventual move to the Summer Palace. Imperial private property received protection, while ancestral temples, tombs, and their sacrificial observances were to be maintained. These provisions sustained a dynastic household without preserving the Qing dynasty as the government of China. (dpm.org.cn)

The retained establishment was commonly called the “small court.” Princes, former officials, tutors, guards, eunuchs, and other attendants continued to serve it, while the Imperial Household Department managed domestic affairs. The settlement allowed existing personnel to remain but prohibited the recruitment of additional eunuchs. Within the palace, documents continued to use the Xuantong reign-year calendar rather than the republican calendar; court dress, deferential forms of address, and ceremonial obeisance reinforced the distinction between palace society and the surrounding republic. The preservation of ancestral rituals and court conventions gave loyalists an institutional centre, although participation in this household did not itself confer office in the republican administration. (dpm.org.cn)

The opportunity for restoration arose from a conflict within the republican leadership, not from authority independently exercised by Puyi. In June 1917, President Li Yuanhong summoned the Qing-loyalist general Zhang Xun to Beijing to mediate his dispute with the recently dismissed premier, Duan Qirui, over China’s participation in the First World War. Zhang brought troops whose retention of the Manchu queue advertised their allegiance to the former dynasty. Instead of merely mediating, he joined court loyalists, including Kang Youwei, in restoring the eleven-year-old Puyi on 1 July. Proclamations replaced “the sixth year of the Republic” with “the ninth year of Xuantong”; dragon flags appeared in Beijing, and imperial appointments announced an attempted revival of Qing government. (sl.nsw.gov.au)

The Manchu Restoration encountered immediate opposition from republican leaders and lacked the military support needed to hold the capital. Li refused to accept the change and took refuge in the Japanese legation. Duan organized forces against Zhang, turning the defence of the republic into the basis for his return to power. His troops defeated the restoration forces in Beijing on 12 July, ending the attempt after twelve days. Zhang escaped into the Dutch legation, and Puyi again ceased to be a reigning sovereign. The decisive military and political actions belonged to Zhang, Duan, and their supporters rather than to the child placed on the throne. (sl.nsw.gov.au)

The restoration’s defeat did not immediately dissolve the palace household or abolish Puyi’s retained title. He continued living in the Forbidden City under the post-abdication arrangements, surrounded by attendants and former Qing officials. The distinction between household privilege and governmental authority therefore survived the crisis: loyalists could continue to address him as emperor and cultivate hopes of restoration, but the small court was not the recognized government. Its continued residence lasted until November 1924, when the republican authorities revised the favorable-treatment terms, abolished the imperial title, and required Puyi to leave the palace. (dpm.org.cn)

Education, palace life, and the imperial household

Puyi’s schooling followed the educational arrangements of the Qing imperial household even after his abdication. His Chinese tutors included Lu Runxiang, Chen Baochen, and subsequently Zhu Yifan; Yiktan taught him Manchu. Instruction centred on classical texts, reading, and calligraphy, with Chen becoming a particularly influential teacher. This education preserved the relationship between sovereign and scholar-official: the instructors were former Qing servants teaching a pupil who continued to receive imperial forms of address within the palace. Manchu remained part of the curriculum, although Puyi later acknowledged that it was his weakest subject. (img.dpm.org.cn)

In March 1919, the Scottish colonial official Reginald Fleming Johnston joined the household as Puyi’s English tutor. His appointment followed a recommendation by Li Jingmai and negotiations involving President Xu Shichang and the British minister. Lessons took place in the Yuqing Palace, where Johnston generally taught for two or three hours daily, with three days off each month. Besides the English language, his teaching covered mathematics, history, geography, and natural history. Illustrated publications introduced Puyi to contemporary technology, while discussion extended to British customs and constitutional monarchy. Johnston nevertheless accommodated the court’s hierarchy, addressing his pupil as emperor and accepting Qing honours, including permission to travel inside the palace in a two-person sedan chair. (dpm.org.cn)

Changes in Puyi’s appearance and possessions accompanied this expanded curriculum. He adopted Western suits and spectacles and took an interest in bicycles, films, and other imported goods. Surviving palace photographs document his Western dress, whereas colourful accounts of the process often come from later recollections. In his autobiography, for example, Puyi described buying an oversized suit and tying its necktie incorrectly, prompting Johnston to arrange properly tailored clothes. Such episodes should be distinguished from the objects and photographs that independently establish his changing habits. Innovation also remained subject to older administrative practices: even the visit of an optician required the Imperial Household Department to choose an auspicious day. (ggzl.dpm.org.cn)

Relations with palace eunuchs combined dependence on their domestic service with attempts to restrict their influence. After his marriage, Puyi sought tighter control over household expenditure and the custody of valuables, including an inventory of palace treasures. A fire in the Jianfu Palace complex in June 1923 destroyed buildings and collections while this scrutiny was under way. Puyi suspected that eunuchs had deliberately started it to conceal theft; that accusation belongs to his account of the event, rather than constituting an established explanation of the fire. The following month, he dismissed most palace eunuchs. Further administrative reform included appointing Zheng Xiaoxu to direct the Imperial Household Department, but these measures did not eliminate the retained court’s institutional structure. (en.wikipedia.org)

The 1922 marriage ceremonies reproduced imperial distinctions of rank. Wanrong was selected as empress, while Wenxiu received the subordinate title Shufei, conventionally translated as Pure Consort. Wenxiu entered the palace on 30 November, preceding Wanrong’s ceremonial arrival on 1 December. Preparations followed four prescribed stages: the preliminary betrothal gifts (nacai), the principal presentation of gifts (dazheng), formal investiture of the empress, and the wedding itself. Palace specialists selected auspicious dates and hours for these proceedings. On 2 December, the newly married couple performed ancestral observances at the Shouhuang Hall in Jingshan. These were ceremonies of the former imperial household, not acts restoring Qing governmental authority; their elaborate ritual arrangements coexisted with Puyi’s increasingly Westernized personal habits. (dpm.org.cn)

Expulsion from the Forbidden City and residence in Tianjin, 1924–1931

On 23 October 1924, during the Second Zhili–Fengtian War, Feng Yuxiang turned his forces against the government in Beijing, detained President Cao Kun, and took control of the capital. The coup brought an end to the arrangements that had allowed Puyi to maintain an imperial household inside the Forbidden City after his abdication. On 4 November, Huang Fu’s acting cabinet approved revisions to the Articles of Favorable Treatment. These abolished Puyi’s imperial title, placed him on the same legal footing as other citizens, and required the household to leave the palace. On 5 November, troops and police under the Beijing garrison commander, Lu Zhonglin, entered the compound and enforced his departure. Puyi moved to his father’s residence, the Prince Chun mansion. His expulsion ended a privileged residential and ceremonial position, not an existing exercise of national governmental authority. (dpm.org.cn)

After restrictions on his movements were lifted later that month, Puyi obtained refuge in the Japanese legation. On 24 February 1925, he travelled to Tianjin under Japanese protection and established himself in its Japanese concession. His principal residence was initially Zhang Garden, the property of Zhang Biao, a former Qing military commander. In July 1929 he moved to Jingyuan, or “Quiet Garden,” also within the concession. This sequence placed his household outside the former imperial precincts but within a foreign-administered district, where Japanese protection became an important condition of his security and political activity. (dpm.org.cn)

The Tianjin household remained a meeting place for Qing loyalists, although their continued observance of court etiquette did not constitute recognition by the republican government. Wang Guowei visited Puyi at Zhang Garden in March 1925; his correspondence also records loyalist arrangements for gifts on Wanrong’s birthday. Political advisers differed over how Puyi might recover his position. Chen Baochen favoured a return to the Beijing palace, whereas Luo Zhenyu and Zheng Xiaoxu promoted reliance on foreign assistance, especially from Japan. Zheng’s previous diplomatic service in Japan helped sustain these connections. Japanese protection and loyalist restoration projects consequently intersected, without the household possessing an independent governmental apparatus. (dpm.org.cn)

The removal of imperial objects had begun before the expulsion. In 1922, Puyi used nominal gifts to his younger brother Pujie and other relatives to transfer works out of the palace. Records subsequently discovered by the committee responsible for settling Qing household affairs listed 1,285 handscrolls and 68 albums, together with valuable early printed books. Objects removed from the palace were later transported from Beijing to Tianjin, and some entered the art market through sales during his residence there. Such transfers dispersed parts of the former court’s holdings of painting, calligraphy, and rare books; they were distinct from the belongings Puyi carried away when ordered to leave in November 1924. (tjbwg.cn)

The revised agreement explicitly distinguished the imperial family’s private property, which it retained, from public property, which belonged to the republican government. That distinction required investigation rather than treating everything inside the palace as Puyi’s personal possessions. An order issued on 7 November 1924 provided for a settlement committee to work with representatives of the former imperial family in identifying and inventorying the two categories. The collections remaining in the palace became the foundation of the Palace Museum, opened on 10 October 1925. They therefore followed a different institutional course from the artworks Puyi had removed and subsequently kept or sold in Tianjin. (dpm.org.cn)

Installation as ruler of Manchukuo, 1931–1934

Japan’s occupation of Manchuria following the Mukden Incident of 18 September 1931 created the setting for Puyi’s return to political office. The Kwantung Army sought to separate northeastern China from the Nationalist government while presenting the resulting administration as an independent state. Puyi’s former imperial position supplied a recognizable symbol around which Japanese officers and Qing loyalists could organize. According to the subsequent Tokyo tribunal judgment, Colonel Kenji Doihara visited him in Tianjin on 2 November 1931 and offered the prospect of enthronement, Japanese recognition, and military protection. Puyi secretly left Tianjin later that month under Japanese escort and was taken to Japanese-controlled territory near Dairen, now Dalian. His departure connected his hopes of restoration with Japan’s plans for the occupied region. (wwws.loc.gov)

Manchukuo was proclaimed on 1 March 1932, but Puyi’s formal inauguration as chief executive took place at Changchun on 9 March. His title was zhizheng, conventionally translated as “chief executive,” and the administration adopted the era name Datong, meaning “Great Unity.” These arrangements did not restore the Qing dynasty: he headed a newly constituted state claiming separation from China, rather than resuming the Chinese imperial throne. Zheng Xiaoxu, a former Qing official and advocate of restoration, became prime minister. Japanese supervision extended to the installation ceremony itself; a contemporary Chinese account preserved in American diplomatic records described its organization under Japanese direction and the attendance of Kwantung Army commander General Honjō Shigeru. (mainuat.chiculture.org.hk)

The distinction between a Manchukuo appointment and a Qing restoration remained important during preparations for monarchy. An American diplomatic report of January 1933 identified two strands within the restoration movement: supporters who hoped eventually to extend Puyi’s authority into China, and those who sought only to make him emperor of Manchukuo. By January 1934, the Japanese government publicly supported the latter arrangement. Ambassador Joseph Grew reported that Tokyo explicitly denied that the proposed enthronement meant restoration of the former Chinese dynasty. The official announcement instead represented Puyi’s elevation as the supposedly unanimous wish of Manchuria’s thirty million inhabitants—a claim advanced by the regime, not an independently established expression of popular consent. (history.state.gov)

On 1 March 1934, Puyi became emperor of Manchukuo and replaced Datong with the era name Kangde, usually rendered “Tranquillity and Virtue.” Foreign Minister Xie Jieshi notified the United States that a monarchical regime had been established, dating his telegram to the first day of the first year of Kangde. The new court remained at Changchun, renamed Hsinking, or “New Capital,” rather than returning to Beijing. Puyi’s residence and court occupied the complex subsequently preserved as the Museum of the Imperial Palace of Manchukuo. The change in title gave the state an imperial ceremonial framework without making it a continuation of the Qing empire or altering its foundation in Japanese occupation. (history.state.gov)

The Manchukuo emperorship and its collapse, 1934–1945

Puyi’s elevation to emperor in March 1934 did not transfer effective control of Manchukuo from Japanese military authorities to the throne. Although he formally appointed ministers, Japanese officials occupied the administrative positions through which appointments and policy were implemented. A contemporary American diplomatic report identified Japanese chiefs of general-affairs bureaus as the principal executive authorities; they were recommended by the Japanese ambassador, who simultaneously commanded the Kwantung Army. In 1934, General Takashi Hishikari held both offices, together with the governorship of the Kwantung Leased Territory. This concentration of military, diplomatic, and administrative authority enabled Japan to direct the government without abolishing its nominally separate imperial institutions. Puyi’s power to confer office therefore differed substantially from the capacity to select officials or determine policy independently. (history.state.gov)

Imperial ceremony presented a different image: that of a recognized sovereign governing in close partnership with Japan. Puyi’s first state visit to Japan, in April 1935, was particularly elaborate. He departed Hsinking, the renamed Changchun, on 2 April with a retinue of 150, travelling through Dairen before embarking aboard the Japanese naval vessel Hiei. Emperor Hirohito received and decorated him, and the programme included palace functions, a joint military review, a government banquet, and visits to the Meiji and Yasukuni shrines and Emperor Taishō’s tomb. An American consular report recorded that advance publicity represented the journey as an expression of Manchukuo’s gratitude for Japanese assistance. These honours publicly staged a relationship between sovereigns, but did not alter the administrative machinery of Japanese control. (history.state.gov)

During the Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II, Puyi’s image and imperial pronouncements became instruments of wartime mobilization. His portrait and rescripts were incorporated into school observances, linking obedience to the emperor with loyalty to the Japanese-sponsored state. He visited Japan again in June 1940 and was received by Hirohito. That year, a National Foundation Shrine dedicated to Amaterasu, the sun deity associated with Japan’s imperial dynasty, was established within the Manchukuo court’s ceremonial system; a solemn ceremony honouring the deity took place on 15 July. These practices connected Puyi’s monarchy more closely to Japanese imperial ideology rather than restoring the institutions of the Qing dynasty. In December 1941, his government followed Japan in declaring war on the United States and Britain. (en.wikipedia.org)

The military basis of the monarchy collapsed in August 1945. The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on 8 August, and Soviet forces entered Manchuria on 9 August. As the offensive broke through Japanese defences, Puyi and his entourage left Changchun by train on the night of 11 August, reaching Dalizigou, near the Korean frontier, on 13 August. Japan’s surrender announcement on 15 August removed the prospect of continued Japanese protection. At Dalizigou, senior officials arranged an abdication decree, which Puyi signed and proclaimed in ceremonies on the night of 17–18 August, terminating his emperorship and the Manchukuo government. (en.wikipedia.org)

Puyi then attempted to reach Japan by air. He flew from the Tonghua area to Shenyang, then also known as Mukden, intending to transfer to a larger aircraft for the onward journey. Soviet troops intercepted his party at the airport before that departure could take place. His capture ended the attempted evacuation of the former emperor to Japan and placed him in Soviet custody. (culture.people.com.cn)

Soviet captivity, Tokyo testimony, and imprisonment in China

After his capture by Soviet forces in August 1945, Puyi remained in the custody of the Soviet Union until 1950. He was initially taken to the vicinity of Chita in Siberia and subsequently held at Khabarovsk. His future became the subject of diplomatic negotiations: the Chinese Nationalist government requested his extradition, while Puyi wrote to Joseph Stalin asking to remain in Soviet territory, fearing for his life if returned to China. Soviet investigators also questioned him about Japanese rule in Manchuria, producing statements that brought him to the attention of prosecutors preparing the Tokyo war-crimes trial. (cambridge.org)

Puyi appeared before the International Military Tribunal for the Far East as a prosecution witness, not as a defendant. He testified over eight court days between 16 and 27 August 1946, with chief prosecutor Joseph B. Keenan personally conducting questioning. His evidence concerned his departure from Tianjin, the establishment of Manchukuo, and the mechanisms through which Japanese officials controlled its administration. He also described economic exploitation, the opium monopoly, Japanese immigration, and the introduction of Shinto observances. These statements presented Manchukuo’s proclaimed independence as incompatible with the extensive authority exercised by Japanese military and civilian representatives. (wctwp.sjtu.edu.cn)

His account of his own conduct was more contentious than his description of Japanese control. Puyi emphasized intimidation and represented his acceptance of office as a response to threats rather than an independent political choice. Defence lawyers challenged this portrayal by questioning his hostility towards the Chinese republic and his ambitions for restoration. The tribunal’s findings did not depend solely on his recollections: Japanese diplomatic telegrams documented Kenji Doihara’s arrangements for his journey to Manchuria, while Seishirō Itagaki’s subsequent evidence supplied further details of the army’s recruitment of him. Japanese domination of Manchukuo and Puyi’s retrospective claim of personal helplessness therefore constituted distinct historical questions. (wctwp.sjtu.edu.cn)

In 1950 the Soviet authorities transferred Puyi to the People’s Republic of China, where he was detained at the Fushun War Criminals Management Centre in Liaoning. The authorities’ programme of “thought reform” sought to dismantle the court-like relationships maintained by his entourage, establish his responsibility for collaboration with Japan, and secure acceptance of the new political order. Study and group discussion accompanied practical labour, including making paper boxes, growing vegetables, and raising chickens. Written self-examination required him to describe his past actions and supplement earlier statements; accounts by former staff describe the use of Japanese prisoners’ confessions, complaints from northeastern Chinese civilians, and testimony from his relatives to challenge omissions. These were supervised institutional procedures, rather than independent autobiographical exercises. (cambridge.org)

On 4 December 1959, Puyi received a special pardon from the Supreme People’s Court, among an initial group of 33 former Manchukuo and Nationalist prisoners classified as war criminals. The measure followed Mao Zedong’s proposal for an amnesty marking the People’s Republic’s tenth anniversary and the pardon order issued by President Liu Shaoqi on 17 September. Puyi’s notification stated that labour and ideological education had produced evidence of reform and authorized his release. The pardon ended his imprisonment; it did not constitute an acquittal or a finding that he had borne no responsibility for his actions under Manchukuo. (cppcc.gov.cn)

Civilian life and death, 1959–1967

Following his pardon on 4 December 1959, Puyi returned to Beijing and entered civilian employment. On 16 February 1960 he reported to the botanical garden attached to the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Botany; two days later he was assigned to its greenhouse group. The placement, arranged under instructions from Zhou Enlai, combined work with continued study rather than training for a scientific career. According to garden employee Fan Zengxing’s later account, the prescribed routine was half a day of labour and half a day of study, with Sundays free and visits into the city every two weeks. The instructions also allowed his physical workload to be reduced because of his age. He remained at the garden for approximately a year, leaving on 6 March 1961 after a farewell meeting with its staff. (cppcc.gov.cn)

Puyi then took up historical-documentary work for the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). His position as a wenshi zhuanyuan, or specialist in historical and cultural materials, belonged to the National Committee’s historical-materials organization. It was an employment appointment, preceding his later membership of the National Committee. A fellow specialist, Li Yikang, recalled that Puyi reviewed submitted recollections concerning the late Qing dynasty, the Beiyang period, and Manchukuo; Li described the material examined as exceeding one million Chinese characters. Puyi also worked on his autobiography, whose established Chinese edition appeared in 1964. These activities made his personal knowledge of the former court and Manchukuo part of the CPPCC’s collection of historical testimony. (cppcc.gov.cn)

In 1962 Puyi married Li Shuxian, a nurse working in Beijing. Their wedding ceremony was held on 30 April at the CPPCC cultural club. This was a civilian marriage, distinct from the dynastic arrangements of his earlier imperial household. The connection with the CPPCC extended to their accommodation: a later account by a member of its staff records that the newly married couple initially lived within the organization’s principal office compound, before moving to a separate courtyard residence nearby. Their married life lasted until Puyi’s death five years later. (paper.people.com.cn)

In November 1964, Zhou Enlai proposed that Puyi and five other formerly imprisoned historical-materials specialists—including Du Yuming and Song Xilian—be invited to become members of the CPPCC National Committee. The Standing Committee approved the proposal, and Puyi joined the fourth National Committee as a specially invited member. A photograph preserved by the CPPCC records him speaking at its first plenary session on 30 December 1964. This consultative membership was separate from his paid historical-research duties: it gave him a place in the political consultative body, not an executive governmental office or any restoration of his former imperial authority. (cppcc.gov.cn)

Puyi’s final years overlapped with the beginning of the Cultural Revolution, launched in 1966; he died during its early phase, rather than after the movement had ended. His health had deteriorated before its outbreak, and he underwent treatment for kidney cancer, including removal of his left kidney. He died in Beijing on 17 October 1967, aged sixty-one. His body was cremated at Babaoshan on 19 October; his widow Li Shuxian and younger brother Pujie were among those accompanying it to the crematorium. (nationalarchives.gov.uk)

Autobiography and the documentary record

Puyi’s autobiography, Wo de qian ban sheng (My First Half of Life), developed from accounts of his past prepared during imprisonment at Fushun, rather than from a manuscript written solely for publication. A retrospective account preserved by the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference describes his prison self-examinations as its foundation. An early version circulated internally in 1960; the substantially reworked, established Chinese edition appeared from Qunzhong Publishing House in March 1964. W. J. F. Jenner’s English translation, entitled From Emperor to Citizen: The Autobiography of Aisin-Gioro Pu Yi, was published by Foreign Languages Press in two volumes in 1964 and 1965. The English title foregrounded the transformation that organized the published narrative: the former sovereign’s passage through imprisonment and political re-education to citizenship. (cppcc.gov.cn)

The book’s preparation involved both relatives and a professional editor. Puyi’s younger brother Pujie recalled taking down his brother’s recollections, adding some experiences of his own, and producing an early narrative ending in 1957. Other relatives, including sisters and brothers-in-law, contributed information during discussions of the family’s history. Li Wenda of Qunzhong Publishing House subsequently undertook much more than stylistic revision. According to Pujie, an initial attempt to shorten and amend the existing text proved unsatisfactory; Puyi and Li then decided to abandon its structure and reconstruct the book. This involved consulting historical archives, interviewing witnesses, and gathering further material from relatives. Pujie dated completion of the revised manuscript to 1963 and explicitly distinguished the published work, drafted by Li, from his own earlier version. (cppcc.gov.cn)

These circumstances make the autobiography a collaborative retrospective source, not an unmediated transcript of Puyi’s memories. Its prison origins, editorial reconstruction, and account of ideological transformation are relevant to the interpretation of admissions, explanations of motive, and descriptions of detention. They do not, by themselves, establish that a particular recollection is inaccurate. The distinction between versions is equally important: the publisher’s original notice for the internally circulated text stated that its historical assertions had not yet been checked, whereas preparation of the public edition included archival research and interviews. Consequently, an assertion’s evidential value depends partly on which version contains it and whether contemporary documentation supports it. (cn.govopendata.com)

For palace life, records of the Qing household and its post-abdication establishment provide evidence independent of later autobiographical reconstruction. Administrative documents can establish ceremonial arrangements and dates without necessarily revealing private motives. For example, a Palace Museum study based on original court archives documents the arrangements for Puyi’s marriage on 1 December 1922. Reginald Johnston’s Twilight in the Forbidden City, published in London in 1934, supplies a different kind of evidence: a tutor’s recollections of the retained court, its officials, and Puyi’s education. Johnston’s close relationship with Puyi gave him access, but his sympathy for restoration also shaped his interpretation. His eyewitness observations therefore need to be distinguished from reported information and political argument. (dpm.org.cn)

Diplomatic correspondence and the Tokyo tribunal record offer further chronological checks. A dispatch from American diplomat Willys R. Peck dated 28 May 1934, for example, records the Chinese National Government’s response to Puyi’s enthronement in Manchukuo, providing contemporary evidence of reactions outside his household. The tribunal transcripts preserve his testimony as a witness in August 1946, including questioning and cross-examination absent from a continuous memoir. On 22 August, when asked to date particular visits and changes in Japanese military personnel, Puyi acknowledged that he could not recall exact years and referred questioners to the Manchukuo Yearbook. Such passages distinguish what he claimed to remember from what required documentary verification; neither the testimony nor the later autobiography automatically corroborates the other, since both contain retrospective statements by the same participant. (history.state.gov)

Historical representation and public memory

The conventional designation “last emperor of China” identifies Puyi as the final sovereign of the Qing dynasty, rather than implying that no subsequent imperial title was proclaimed. His abdication in 1912 ended Qing government, although he briefly returned to the throne during the restoration of July 1917. Yuan Shikai separately accepted an imperial title on 12 December 1915 and abandoned it on 22 March 1916; this was an attempted new monarchy, not a continuation of the Qing succession. Puyi’s later emperorship in Japanese-controlled Manchukuo, from 1934 to 1945, likewise belonged to a separate state and did not restore his authority over China. These distinctions separate dynastic succession from later uses of the imperial title. (en.wikipedia.org)

Bernardo Bertolucci’s The Last Emperor (1987) presented Puyi’s life to an international cinema audience, with John Lone as the adult Puyi, Joan Chen as Wanrong, and Peter O’Toole as Reginald Johnston. At the sixtieth Academy Awards on 11 April 1988, it won all nine awards for which it had been nominated: picture, directing, adapted screenplay, cinematography, art direction, costume design, film editing, original score, and sound. The awards recognized both its narrative adaptation and its visual and musical construction, including Vittorio Storaro’s cinematography and the score by Ryuichi Sakamoto, David Byrne, and Cong Su. (criterion.com)

The film is a dramatic reconstruction, not a documentary biography. Its opening juxtaposes Puyi’s captivity with recollections of his childhood enthronement, while its contrasting colours and enclosed spaces connect palace privilege with later confinement. Location filming in the Forbidden City supplies an authentic architectural setting, but does not establish the historical accuracy of dialogue, private encounters, or the motivations attributed to its characters. Film critic David Thomson has emphasized the production’s transformation of palace settings through design and lighting into scenes of fiction. Its representation of Puyi therefore needs to be distinguished from the documentary record, even where buildings and broad chronological events are recognizable. (criterion.com)

The Forbidden City’s conversion into the Palace Museum placed Puyi’s former surroundings within public collections and historical interpretation. Following his expulsion in 1924, a committee assumed management of the palace and audited its contents. The museum opened on 10 October 1925, with a ceremony before the Palace of Heavenly Purity. Its published inventory comprised twenty-eight volumes and recorded more than 1.86 million items, including artworks, furnishings, books, and historical documents. Cataloguing, exhibition, and research consequently replaced the household’s exclusive possession as the principal institutional framework for interpreting these objects. The palace received national heritage protection in 1961 and World Heritage inscription in 1987, recognizing a cultural heritage extending across the Ming and Qing periods rather than commemorating Puyi alone. (intl.dpm.org.cn)

A different interpretive emphasis governs his former palace in Changchun. Established in 1962, the Palace Museum of the Manchurian Regime preserves the site associated with his Manchukuo emperorship. Its official presentation treats the palace as evidence of Japanese military occupation and the operation of a dependent regime; its designation as a patriotic education base explicitly connects preservation with public historical education. Here Puyi’s residence is interpreted principally through the history of occupation, rather than through the imperial art collections and centuries-long architectural history foregrounded in Beijing. (gojilin.gov.cn)

References

1. 宣统皇帝 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
2. 光绪皇帝 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
3. Zaifeng, Prince Chunen.wikipedia.org
4. Puyi - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
5. P'u Yi su Enciclopedia | Sapere.itsapere.it
6. 4 / The 1911 Revolution | Manchus and Han | University of Washingtonuw.manifoldapp.org
7. Exploring Chinese History :: Politics :: Government Documents :: The Articles of Favorable Treatmentibiblio.org
8. 优待条件 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
9. 《紫禁城小朝廷的社会史研究》 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
10. 遜清皇室小朝廷zh.wikipedia.org
11. 9 Zhang Xun Restoration (1917) | State Library of New South Walessl.nsw.gov.au
12. 故宫博物院：溥仪出宫相关史述dpm.org.cn
13. 紫禁城：从皇宫到博物院 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
14. 溥仪出宫之五：驱逐出宫 - 故宫博物院dpm.org.cn
15. 庄士敦dpm.org.cn
16. 中西文化交汇中的逊帝溥仪与他的洋师傅dpm.org.cn
17. 溥仪与庄士敦（PDF）img.dpm.org.cn
18. 溥仪大婚（PDF）dpm.org.cn
19. 逊清宫廷历法与择吉（PDF）dpm.org.cn
20. 中西文化交汇中的逊帝溥仪与他的洋师傅（续页）dpm.org.cn
21. 展览列表页ggzl.dpm.org.cn
22. 中华民国临时执政府修正《清室优待条件》dpm.org.cn
23. 溥仪出宫之五：驱逐出宫（续页）dpm.org.cn
24. 故宫博物院馆藏清宫散佚书画研究资料dpm.org.cn
25. 《罗振玉、王国维与溥仪》（续）dpm.org.cn
26. 故宫博物院关于溥仪复辟活动的研究资料dpm.org.cn
27. 天津博物馆tjbwg.cn
28. 故宫博物院院刊：清室优待条件与清宫古物保护研究dpm.org.cn
29. “清室善后委员会”dpm.org.cn
30. Judgment International Military Tribunal for the Far East, Part B, Chapter Vwwws.loc.gov
31. The Consul General at Tientsin (Lockhart) to the Secretary of Statehistory.state.gov
32. Puyien.chinaculture.org
33. Historical Documents: Foreign Relations of the United States, 1932, Volume III, Document 791history.state.gov
34. The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to the Secretary of State, January 13, 1933history.state.gov
35. The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to the Secretary of State, February 8, 1934history.state.gov
36. Mr. Hsieh Chieh-shih to the Secretary of Statehistory.state.gov
37. Museum of the Imperial Palace of 'Manchukuo'govt.chinadaily.com.cn
38. Historical Documents: Foreign Relations of the United States, 1934, Volume III, Document 235history.state.gov
39. Historical Documents: Foreign Relations of the United States, 1935, Volume III, Document 98history.state.gov
40. Competing Visions of the Modern: Urban Transformation and Social Changeescholarship.org
41. 溥仪宣布《退位诏书》旧址dfz.jl.gov.cn
42. The real Manchurian candidates: Chinese war criminals in the postwar, prisoners of historycambridge.org
43. 研究院近期成果 | 龚志伟：东京审判中的溥仪作证及其检控价值wctwp.sjtu.edu.cn
44. 环球人物：溥仪特赦及改造经历报道paper.people.com.cn
45. 我所亲历亲见亲闻的溥仪——人民政协网rmzxw.com.cn
46. 人民日报 1984-12-15电子版cn.govopendata.com
47. 《我的前半生》出版内情rmzxw.com.cn
48. From Emperor to Citizen: the Autobiography of Aisin-Gioro P'u Yicambridge.org
49. 《紫禁城的黄昏》dpm.org.cn
50. The Counselor of Legation in China (Peck) to the Secretary of Statehistory.state.gov
51. International Military Tribunal for the Far East: Proceedings, 22 August 1946legal-tools.org
52. 8 Reign of Yuan Shikai as emperor (1915-16)sl.nsw.gov.au
53. The 60th Academy Awards Memorable Momentsoscars.org
54. The 60th Academy Awards | 1988oscars.org
55. The Last Emperoren.wikipedia.org
56. About the Palace Museumintl.dpm.org.cn
57. About—The Palace Museumintl.dpm.org.cn
58. Palace Museum of the Manchurian Regimegojilin.gov.cn