legal compilation in early modern denmark and norway readers. Hence, Hedegaard’s underlying strategy was to adapt the text to the expectations and specific demands of its intended audience, much like Holberg’s intention with his textbook on natural law.75 Another popular compendium was Engelbrecht Hesselberg’s Juridisk Collegiumin four volumes, published between 1753 and 1755.76 We can assume that Hesselberg, who was just 27 years old when the first volume was published, collected much of the material while studying law in Copenhagen. He was publicly accused of having uncritically compiled much of its content.77 Hesselberg defended himself by acknowledging that he had followed the principles of Professor Peder Kofod Ancher and the highly respected Royal Privy Counsellor Henrik Stampe, but he rejected the notion that he had compiled transcripts of lectures.78 Regardless of the alleged lack of originality his book sold extremely well. According to Björne, it was essential reading for judges on the lower levels of the court hierarchy and anyone taking the legal exam in Danish in subsequent decades.79 The editor of the second edition, Jens Dons, admitted it had its flaws and he had therefore provided additional annotations.80 However, the mere fact that he chose to republish it indicates that he saw the merit of disseminating legal knowledge in a structured manner to an audience that rarely had access to lectures on law, which were still given in Latin at the University of Copenhagen. Until the end of the eighteenth century, most law students preferred the so-called Danish Exam to the three higher degrees which required advanced Latin. Guides for law students were another legal genre of enormous practical relevance. Again, Andreas Højer was first to publish encyclopaedic 75 Hedegaard 1764, foreword: ‘Thi skulde man have afhandletdet saavidt, at det blevet tydeligt for alle, endog for de Ulærde, saa var Skriftet baade blevet for kostbart og stort, og meget ble indført, ubrugbart for de fleste, da man tvertimod i en Bog, bestemt til meenige Brug, syntes at burde fornemmelig rette sig efter Mængden.’ 76 Engelbrecht Hesselberg, Juridisk Collegium, 4 vols (Copenhagen, 1753–1755). 77 In a review in the journal Nachrichten von denWissenschaften und Künsten in den Königlich Dänischen Reichen und Ländern1 (1763), 326–7 A. Friedrich Büsching criticizes Hesselberg for being unoriginal and having compiled principles of his teachers. 78 Hesselberg 1755, iii. foreword. 79 Björne 1995, 160. 80 Engelbrecht Hesselberg, Juridisk Collegium, Igiennemseet og med Anmærkninger forøget, ed. Jens Dons (Copenhagen, 1763). 217
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=