Summer in Edmonton is one big Festival. I have already mentioned that on World Cup final Sunday we came across the Street Performers' Festival, which actually lasted for numerous days but I couldn’t be bothered to go there. Then there are the Heritage days, some kind of art or markets festival, music and I don’t know what elseof which I haven't taken notice of. The next one, starting tomorrow and lasting until next Sunday, is the "Edmonton and Athabaska District Historic Festival".

Yesterday night I browsed through the whole programme and marked those events which are close (i.e. in Edmonton) and sound interesting. As to the events outside the city I have to admit I have no idea where all those places are. (Superficial, dumb European!) The only one I know anything about is St. Albert, a beautiful and rather posh town north of Edmonton. And this is today’s joke:

Father Lacombe Chapel: Tour.
"Tour the Father Lacombe Chapel, one of the oldest buildings in Alberta. It was built in 1861..."

Mind you: Not one of the oldest in St. Albert – one of the oldest in the whole state of Alberta! You see that is another issue I have with Edmonton. I think in different categories.

1861...
...the Treaty of Limerick (1691) – starting point of my M.A. dissertation – had been signed 170 years earlier (which is two dozen years more than the age of that chapel).
...Joseph II (*1741) would have been 120 years old and Kaunitz (*1711) would have been 150 years old.
...the first mentioning of the name Innsbruck ("Inspruk", 1167) appeared no less than 694 earlier. Just imagine we had such a festival: Although we’d be surprised how much of today’s Innsbruck was mere meadows back in the 19th century, what do you think, how long would it take to do a tour through all buildings which were built before 1861?

But I shouldn’t be too harsh. Point number one: At least they do have a festival here. An annual nine days historic festival; do we have anything like that somewhere in Austria? In fact I have found a number of things I might check out so I have to divide the next week carefully into my work history hours and my leisure history time.

Besides, it’s all a matter of perspective. 1861, that’s about five generations. Who knows the names of all their ancestors living at that time? Who knows more about them than just names, places and dates of birth and marriage? And imagine, how many children have been born in Edmonton since 1861, how many immigrants from all over the world have arrived here. How many different thoughts and feelings and experiences? Millions. Millions of unique stories.

Looking at it that way, there’s an awful lot of history to be read, heard, discovered, visited. Maybe not as spectacular and world shaking as elsewhere but enough for a lifetime, for some months, for nine days.

I’ve been here now for almost two months - only six days missing to that jubilee, which by the way is also my name day. A dual reason to celebrate, maybe I should try to go out for dinner with David and Lilla and Eric or so. I’ll see. Unbelievable how quickly time flies! To me it doesn’t feel as if I’d left home such a long time ago. To me it seems as if I’d just left a couple of days ago – my feelings and thoughts are still so strongly connected to you. Just yesterday (when I received a parcel from home) I thought: I think I’m getting old. Leaving was so much harder than four years ago. And I admit I still can’t imagine to stay here permanently. There’s too much I left behind: My family, my friends ("the family which I have chosen by myself"), my country. Home. Don't get me wrong, it's not that I wasn’t glad to have a job, or not grateful for this opportunity or not curious about the things around me. It’s simply that I see this stay as an interesting phase of my life but I can’t imagine it being the basis of a future here. But that’s another topic; actually I wanted to talk about something completely different. So: Cut! - And re-start:

I’ve been here now for almost 2 months – and today I finally start the long expected (or so I assume) description of what precisely I’m doing: I’ll start this account from scratch, because I don’t know whom I have told what and some of my previous assumptions have proved incorrect anyway. Also I will split it up in several sections, for the sake of you and me..

---

1. Historical Background

Dr. Szabo, the Director of the Institute, is – among other things – an expert on Prince (Fürst) Wenzel Anton von Kaunitz-Rietberg (1711-94). Kaunitz was a (or the) leading advisor throughout almost the whole of the monarchy’s reform era in the 18th century, during the reigns of Maria-Theresia (1740-80), Joseph II (1780-90), Leopold II (1790-92) and the first two years of Franz II and I (1792-1835).

Kaunitz’s importance may have been expressed quite well by Derek Beales (whose book on Joseph is brilliant – or at least the first volume up to 1780, the second is still to appear) who for the time between 1765 and 1780 spoke of a triumvirate between Maria-Theresa (effective ruler of the monarchy), Joseph II (her son and co-regent, emperor) and Chancellor Kaunitz.

From 1753 Kaunitz official function had been Chancellor of State (Staatskanzler). Being head of the so-called House, Court and State Chancellery (Haus-, Hof- und Staatskanzlei) effectively made him the Monarchy’s foreign minister. (But of course the decisive authority was always the respective monarch.) Besides, this Chancellery of State was also responsible for such important regions of the monarchy as the Austrian Netherlands (Belgium and Luxemburg) and Lombardy.

Apart from that a lot of Kaunitz’s influence stemmed from the fact that he was Maria-Theresia’s most trusted advisor. Consequently, when – on Kaunitz’s proposal – a new prime advisory body for interior matters named the Council of State was formed in 1760 he himself was integral part of it. As to now I haven’t read much about this Council of State yet, so detailed information may follow later. This week I’ve started to read Dr. Szabo’s book on Kaunitz or at least the first volume up to 1780, the second is still to appear. Which brings me right into the topic of my purpose...

(to be continued)

---

PS: Actually as you all know me I shouldn’t need to write that. Yet, to the shyer guests: If any questions should arise – please dare to ask! After... ehm, "some" years of studies it’s sometimes difficult for me to assess what is too much, or too little, or too complicated (and so forth) for ordinary readers..

Diese Woche hab ich es noch gar nicht geschafft, mich ein bisschen hinzusetzen und was zu schreiben.. Deshalb gibt's heute nur ein Bildches:

Ob man diesen Glaser wegen Anstiftung zur Sachbeschaedigung anklagen koennte?