Literacy

Catechism is a kind of echo, the learned Christen Bang explained, making no secret of his Greek: the teacher reads out loud Luther’s text, his pupils repeating it thereafter, often with one echoing voice. Learning by rote was probably the only teaching method Bang knew, Luther having prescribed it in his preface. This method certainly served as a didactic template for all teaching of the catechism after the Reformation, in Germany as well as in Scandinavia. It is a common misunderstanding that Luther championed literacy in his endeavour to enable layfolk to read the Bible on their own. The opposite is probably closer to the truth. The reformer understood early on that the risk would be much too great. Laypeople needed guidance to understand properly what they were reading, even pastors were not to be trusted.1 See G. Strauss, ‘Lutheranism and Literacy: A Reassessment’, in K. von Greyerz (ed.), Religion and Society in Early Modern Europe 1500–1800 (London, 1984), pp. 109–23. Thus he insisted that the text of the catechism, including his own expositions, should always be rendered verbatim. Luther accordingly addresses his Small Catechism to ‘ordinary pastors and preachers’ as well as all heads of the family, not to illiterate children. Having recited the text, the preachers – or fathers – should make the children repeat it, again and again, until they knew it by heart. This plan presupposed (1) that the preacher himself had mastered the art of reading, whereas (2) his pupils had not. They would not have, nor would they need, a copy of the book until much later. Fathers should take care to examine their households once a week, Luther insists in his preface to the Large or German Catechism; if the children – or servants – had failed to learn what they were supposed to, there would be no supper.

In Denmark–Norway, learning by rote seems to have been the preferred method until the eighteenth century. Petter Dass, for instance, writing his Catechism Songs in the 1690s, clearly envisages his audience as listeners.2 ‘Ordet indbæres […] til Hiertet’ with the editor’s commentary, in Dass’ dedicatory preface to his relatives (P. Dass, Katekismesanger. D. Mort: Luthers Lille Catechismus, Forfatted I beqvemme Sange, under føyelige Melodier, critical edn by J. Haarberg (Oslo, 2013), <www.bokselskap.no/boker/katekismesanger/tittelside>. However, deans, pastors and parents had begun teaching the young how to read properly much earlier than that, not only to recognise a printed text they had already memorised. In this respect, Charlotte Appel has pointed to a number of enlightening paratexts. One early example is Peder Lauritzen, who in his 1594 exposition takes it for granted that his Danish-language book has layfolk among its readers.3 Ch. Appel, Læsning og bogmarked i 1600-tallets Danmark, vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 2001), p. 183. Appel also demonstrates that in 1616 the bishop of Zealand, H. P. Resen, decreed that the deans should actually teach their pupils how to read ‘as far as it goes’,4 Ibid., p. 147. his reservation clearly signalling his doubts whether the recommendation was feasible.

At least some deans did their best to follow up on the bishop’s directive. From the middle of the 1600s they could find support from a new kind of primer: The Catechism ABC. The first we know of, still preserved, appeared in Copenhagen in 1649: one sheet (16 pp.) containing a survey of the letters of the alphabet, in lower case as well as capitals, plus the five main parts in large type.5 Ibid., pp. 160, 163. The oldest preserved ABC printed in Norway dates from 1804, when secular ABCs had also entered the market.6 D. Skjelbred, ‘“… de umistelige Bøger”: En studie av den tidlige norske abc-tradisjonen’ (PhD thesis, Oslo, 1998) and Norske ABC-bøker 1777–1997 (Tønsberg, 2000).

Darkness still presides over the early history of literacy in Denmark–Norway. It seems clear enough, though, that deans giving catechism lessons and parents taking their daily devotions seriously must have actively taught reading from an early date, despite the fact that they were not obliged to do so. Book-reading among the common people can hardly have been unheard of after the Reformation. In Denmark, according to Appel, the ability to read was ‘more typical than atypical’ by the end of the seventeenth century.7 Ch. Appel, Læsning og bogmarked i 1600-tallets Danmark, vol. 1, p. 319. A significant example from Toten in Norway (approx. 70 miles northwest of the capital) tells us that the ability to read print, at least locally, must have been widespread in 1681, as the local pastor donated a free copy of his exposition-type catechism to each household in his parish.8 Ibid., pp. 184–5.

Board school (1739), confirmation (1736) and Pontoppidan’s exposition-type catechism (1737) – the main instruments of Christian VI’s state pietism – definitely represent a marked change in development. Teaching became more regular and systematic, and the curriculum was standardised. However, learning by rote still held sway for as long as it was unthinkable to ignore Luther’s original prescription. School no longer started with pupils memorising; it ended with it, confirmation serving as a final exam. When a confirmand had passed his or her examination in church, he or she was ready for Holy Communion and life as an adult. Reading classes belonged to primary school. It was assumed that pupils would benefit from these classes in their endeavours to understand what they had to learn by heart: Luther’s Small Catechism at school and Pontoppidan’s 759 questions and answers as they prepared for confirmation. This massive indoctrination in the catechism continued well into the twentieth century. Admittedly, Pontoppidan’s hegemony did gradually lose momentum by the end of the nineteenth century. In 1911 a new Act replacing the old one of 1736 made confirmation no longer obligatory.9 Odelstingsproposisjon (Ot. prp.) no. 12 (1911). Step by step, learning by rote had to make way for the methods of modern education. Today (2020) only one private school, a relic of ancient pietism in the coastal town of Egersund in southwestern Norway, ‘to some extent’ still clings to Pontoppidan’s old standard.10 According to Raimond Sleveland, headmaster of Gamleveien school in Egersund (e-mail 18.06.2018).