This article compares the content and quality of mid-eighteenth-century news accounts about the 1748 conclusion of peace in Aix-la-Chapelle that were published in Dutch newspapers and news digests. It also assesses the position of news digests between newspapers that included topical information and historiography. This case demonstrates that while newspapers can be considered as a first step in the writing of history, news digests offered a further step. Newspapers provided factual information ordered according to chronological principles, yet due to incorrect sources and uncertainties also included mistakes and rumors. By making better news summaries and providing commentary, news digest editors could avoid such failures and had more time and opportunity to put facts into perspective. They could also reflect on the news via artistic interpretations, such as allegorical engravings. The case shows the different ways news was managed in the Dutch Republic's mid-eighteenth-century news media. KEYWORDS news culture; Dutch Republic; newspapers; news digests; historiography; Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748) In August 1744, Dutch newspapers advertised a new half-year volume of the news digest Nederlandsch gedenkboek of Europische Mercurius 1 (Dutch Chronicle or European Mercury), covering the period January-June 1744. Its Amsterdam publishers, Bernardus van Gerrevink and the Ratelband Heirs, recommended the edition as a work of great value because of 'the circumstances of the time'. Their announcement also promoted the sale of previous volumes covering the period 1740-1743, by stating that those issues would provide 'a complete history' of the years since Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI had passed away. 2 In February 1745, similar advertisements were placed in Dutch newspapers for the next half-year volume of the Europische Mercurius, concerning the period July-December 1744. In this case, the advertisement text continued with the phrase that previous volumes, dealing with the years from 1740, would give an account of all acts of war and state between the death of Emperor Charles VI and the moment his successor Charles VII had passed away. 3 The last phrase should not be taken too literally since the emperor's death, on January 20, 1745, would be reported in the succeeding volume that was still in the editor's hands. 4 However, when these advertisements were published in