Saga - 1987, Side 88

86
LOFTUR GUTTORMSSON
itself. This idea of supervision led among other things to a closer definition
of the concept of youth in the bishopric of Hólar than in Skálholt, where re-
gistration covered all parishioners regardless of age and stage in the educa-
tion process. But, whether as cause or effect of this discrepancy, it does seem
apparent that the education of young people in the bishopric of Hólar during
this period was more in keeping with the public educational requirements
than was that of their counterparts in the bishopric of Skálholt.
The article also maintains that the Skálholt bishops' desire to do their ut-
most to uphold the legal demands for the keeping of Church registers - and
the success with which they did so - have in fact hitherto been underesti-
mated. The Skálholt bishops cannot be accused of indifference: they testify
on the contrary to diligence and dedication. It is also clear that the keeping of
Church registers was much more widespread during the period under dis-
cussion than has hitherto been allowed. This is especially clear as regards the
keeping of ministerial books (prestsþjónustubækur), which only a few years
after the passing of the law had become common practice among the parish
priests. At the same time many priests were reluctant to keep thorough
parish registers (sóknarmannatöl) - this was more time and paper consum-
ing - but it is likely that a decade after the law came into effect some form of
register keeping was common practice among at least half of the parish
priests in the bishopric. These registers were in many cases rather incom-
plete, due primarily to ignorance on the part of the parish priests as to how
to keep them.
In view of the information available on the keeping of ministerial books it
becomes evident that a much smaller percentage of them has survived than
used to be assumed. It may be estimated that for the four provosts' districts
taken into account by the study about a quarter of the ministerial books have
survived from the first years of bishop Finnur Jónsson's tenure, but less than
a fifth of the parish register. This means that the Church's efficiency in cal-
ling in such books must be reconsidered: previous assessments have invari-
ably been based solely on the number of extant books.
There are various reasons why the older Church registers, in particular the
ministerial books, have survived so badly. Many of them were badly made
and kept, probably because of the lack of paper, a factor the importance of
which cannot be underestimated. The semi-literacy of some parish priests
will also have left its mark on register keeping. But a diligently kept register
was not ensured preservation. The effects of decay and natural disasters,
such as fire or bad weather which might hit the priest on his travels to and
from church, might ruin the best kept books.
The way in which and the success with which parish priests were made to
keep regular registers of their parishioners must be regarded as an important
part in the building up of a centrally regulated Church power in Iceland. The
registration of the parish "souls" with a description of their social and
spiritual condition was an important factor in controlling and estimating the
Christian/ethical upbringing which Pietism put in motion. The law stipu-
lated that registration be carried out at least once a year, but judging from the