Project 1. The Arrival of Writing

The first project deals with a phenomenon that is not specifically European, but common to all great civilisations, i.e. the arrival of writing. Here we are dealing with the most important technology imported from the centre, without which the rest of the cultural import would have been impossible. The project aims at making a vital contribution, empirically as well as theoretically, to the growing research in literacy studies. Although this line of research had predecessors in the 19th and early in the 20th century, the main theoretical and empirical systematisation was pioneered 40 years ago by e.g. Marshall McLuhan, Ernst Havelock and Jack Goody (McLuhan 1962; Havelock 1963; Goody & Watt 1968). They presented writing as a technology able to instigate fundamental cognitive, social, and institutional changes; the written word was responsible for the development of the specifically modern and rational way of thinking, including a critical historical consciousness. As for the social consequences of the technology, the emergence of ethnic identity and nationalism has frequently been pointed out, as well as the establishment of the state with its concomitant administrative use of writing. Stimulating as these radical hypotheses may be, later research has presented a more balanced picture of the consequences of the introduction of the written word (Melve 2001b). Although the empirical side of the arrival of writing has been dealt with concerning the early medieval period (McKitterick 1989, 1990; Richter 1994), the 'breakthrough' of a literate culture in the 11th and 12th century has not received due attention. Our project attempts to remedy a gap in our knowledge of the extent (i.e. ability to read and write), as well as the consequences, of the arrival of writing to the northern and eastern periphery in the High Middle Ages. As such, we want to direct our main focus towards five aspects - four empirical and one theoretical - all interrelated and also linked in various ways to the three other projects.

The first aspect is the relationship between oral and written. There are great communicative differences within the Scandinavian territory; differences to which our project will pay close attention, as they are important for reaching an adequate understanding of the cultural complexity of the area. The Saami culture continued to be totally oral even after Christianisation. Like other vernacular literatures, the literature in Old Norse developing in the following period was strongly influenced by older oral traditions, despite the fact that an indigenous script, runes, had been in use all over Scandinavia for about 800 years before Christianisation and continued to be used throughout the Middle Ages, mainly for shorter messages. The interrelationship between one oral and two literary cultures (Latin and Old Norse) and between two alphabets, as well as the consequent modification of communicative patterns, show the importance of the technology for understanding cultural history and exchange. A number of interesting questions can be posed, such as the relationship between the 'democratic' oral culture and the more elitist literary culture and the extent to which the latter influenced the social and cultural standing of different social groups and the position of women (Mundal 1983, 1990, 1998c). In this context, our project will draw on recent theoretical approaches, as well as an older discussion, the so-called freeprose/bookprose-discussion about the origin and character of the Icelandic sagas (Mundal 1977).

The second aspect is the relationship between Latin and the vernacular. While the latter has been thoroughly studied for each nation or language, scholars have only recently subjected the many levels of influence from the common Medieval Latin heritage to serious research (Green 1994; Reuter 1996; Spence 1996; Bagge 2001). It is necessary not only to study the influence of Latin on the development of Nordic vernaculars, but also to compare the major lines of development of Old Norse, Danish and Swedish written communication to other vernacular cultures in the periphery (partly closer to the centres) such as Dutch, Czech and Polish. Why were some used already in the 12th and 13th centuries to channel a wide range of communication (Old Norse, Dutch, Czech), why were others latecomers (13th -14th centuries) and even then restricted to law and various religious compositions (Danish, Swedish, Polish)?

The third aspect is the symbolic and practical communication made possible by the hand-written book as a medium. A study of this is closely related to the institutionalisation of religion (cf. Project 2 below) and to the general question of cultural encounter, intellectual debate and the gradual rise of an elitist public sphere. The first important 'public' polemic concerned the relationship between the spiritual and the secular power (1075-1122), ensuing from the reforms of Pope Gregory VII. The patterns of intellectual discourse and specialisation arising after this polemic were of great importance for the intellectual culture of the centre as well as the periphery. A particularly important aspect of these long-term effects concern the development of law which has been considered the most lasting contribution of the Middle Ages to modern European culture (Berman 1983, Radding 1988, Huff 1993).

A more practical side to this third aspect is the production of handwritten books. The strictures imposed on authors and copyists of literary works formed an important background and framed their messages in a way that has previously been underestimated. On the other hand, beautiful calligraphic books preserved in exclusive 'sacred' libraries also lent their work a monumentality and deeper significance that has been overlooked (cf. Mortensen 1995, 2000 & forthcoming). Other questions relevant in this context are the history of medieval libraries, text circulation, and the concrete aspects of intertextuality, questions that can be much better answered today than only a few decades ago due to progress in manuscript cataloguing. These physical aspects of writing, copying, and archiving need more attention in literary analysis.

The fourth aspect is the administrative use of writing, which is closely connected to the study of royal and ecclesiastical government, and of fundamental importance for understanding the emergence of the European state system in the Middle Ages. Although much research exists on the quantitative side of written records and archives, this material has only to a limited extent been dealt with from the point of view of orality and literacy. However, the research projects in Zürich, Utrecht, and Münster - paying particular attention to different facets of the communicative foundations of the medieval state - will provide one point of departure for our project. In addition, the question of administrative literacy has been discussed concerning a few countries - England (Clanchy 1993), Italy (Petrucci 1995) and France (Benton 1992), a discussion that offers a second starting point. However, we still lack a more thorough understanding of the communicative similarities and differences between the periphery (Scandinavia, Eastern Europe) and the centre, because comparative research is virtually non-existent (Adamski 1996).

We intend to make the centre-periphery perspective a point of departure for basic research into the extent and functioning of administrative literacy. Hence, in addition to providing vital basic research on the respective countries in the periphery, the comparative perspective throws light on the process of state formation in the Later Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period (Project 3). The comparative perspective also enables us to grasp several distinctive processes of cultural exchange. It will be particularly interesting to analyse the interrelationship between the oral and the written dimension of the administrative system in relation to the legal basis of the emerging administrative structures. A host of interesting question can be posed, all of which are of fundamental importance to the notion of state building in general and the justification of power in particular. For instance, to what extent did writing provide the authoritative basis of laws, as opposed to oral promulgation (Haug 1995). In Norway, the use of written attestation of contracts entered into orally and symbolically illustrates the problematic relationship between the oral and the written within the administrative order of the nascent state (Hamre 1968, 1997; Haug 1999).

The fifth aspect concerns the theoretical component. The initial theoretical framework presented by the pioneers of literacy studies - Goody in particular - needs to be modified. The framework operates by a dichotomous understanding of 'oral' and 'written', as a result of which intermediate forms as well as the interrelationship between a plurality of oral and written forms (i.e. the Latin and the vernacular) are lost sight of (Melve 2001a). Although the theoretical discussion has been an integrated part of literacy studies from the start (Street 1984; Goody 1986; Olsen 1994), the discussion has not - with one exception, Brian Stock's model of 'textual communities' (Stock 1983) - offered a constructive analytical framework for the investigation of the arrival of writing. The need for a theory able to grasp the specific medieval pattern of communication in its plurality (Mortensen 1996; Mostert 1999; Melve forthcoming) therefore has to be taken seriously. Because of the comparative perspective of our project, the empirical basis will enable the theoretical constructs to deal with the complex relationship between the oral and the written, including a plurality of written, aural and oral forms. The project will attempt to formulate a framework on the basis of our empirical research; a theoretical framework transcending earlier discussions and hopefully presenting an analytical tool better able to grasp the practical functions of the different forms of medieval communication.