Saga - 1987, Blaðsíða 87

VIÐ RÆTUR KIRKJULEGS REGLUVELDIS A ÍSLANDI
85
4. Manntal 1762. Þingeyjar-, Múlasýslur.
5- Prestsþjónustubækur og sóknarmannatöl.
Hallormsstaður S-Múl., sóknm.tal 1751 (sic) -...1793.
Kálfafell V-Skaft., sóknm.tal 1748-1782.
Eyvindarhólar Rang., sóknm.tal 1751-1782.
Mosfell Árn., sóknm.tal 1754 (sic) -1779.
Hvalsnes (Kirkjuvogur og Njarðvík) Kjal., sóknm.tal 1758-1790.
Reykjavík Kjal., sóknm.tal 1758.
Reynivellir Kjal., sóknm.tal 1763 (sic) -1796.
Reykholt Borg., sóknm.tal 1754-1782.
Rafnseyri V-Isafj., sóknm.tal 1748-...1761.
Holt V-ísafj., sóknm.tal 1761 (brot, með afskrift).
Tröllatunga Strand., sóknm.tal 1759-1784.
Hrafnagil Eyjafj., sóknm.tal 1769-1783.
Ríp Skag., prestsþjón.bók 1756-1784 (einnig sóknm.tal 1759, brot).
Þönglabakki (og Flatey), S-Þing., sóknm.tal 1784-1829.
Ýmsar prestsþjónustubækur 1746-1784 (hafðar til hliðsjónar).
Summary
This article is an investigation of Icelandic parish registers, and examines the
difference between the registers of the two bishoprics of Hólar and Skálholt.
Although the law of 1746 concerning the registers was the same for the two,
registration practice differed considerably between the two bishoprics: regi-
stration was confined in the bishopric of Hólar primarily to the young, while
in the bishopric of Skálholt it covered all parishioners. Only the latter was in
accordance with the visitation ordinance of 1746, and in fact it may be said
that for the period 1746-84 there are no real parish registers for the bishopric
°f Hólar. Instructions regarding registration given by the bishops of Hólar to
their parish priests also lay especial emphasis on the registration of the
young.
lt was not until after 1784 that the Hólar registers took the form the bishops
°f Skálholt had always kept to. The manner in which this co-ordination was
effected is significant: Árni Þórarinsson, bishop at Hólar, circulated among
h's parish priests an exemplar for registration adapted more or less directly
frorn that of his counterpart at Skálholt. This was for all intents and purposes
'dentical to the exemplar Finnur Jónsson, bishop at Skálholt (1754-85), had
8'ven the priests around 1760.
The article maintains that unclear wording of the registration laws them-
selves was at least partially the cause of these differences in interpretation re-
garding execution. It is however not easy to explain why the bishops of
Holar used their authority the way they did in this matter. The precedent of
udvig Harboe, the man behind the changes in rules and regulations in
celandic religious and educational matters, may have had some effect. His
r^forrns contained among other things an emphasis on the regulation of the
hnstian education of young people, the older generation being Ieft to see to