D&D
Moldvay only covers to level 6. Cook wrote expert. However, Moldvay states:
4 2 1st level, 1 2nd level<br>
5 2 1st level, 2 2nd level<br>
6 3 1st level, 2 2nd level
D&D Basic, p. B18
No third level clerical spells are included in Moldvay.
Cook Expert shows your hop:
L Title Spells
1 Acolyte - - - - -
2 Adept 1 - - - -
3 Priest (Priestess) 2 - - - -
4 Vicar 2 1 - - -
5 Curate 2 2 - - -
6 Elder 2 2 1 1 -
7 Bishop 2 2 2 1 1
Cook, D&D Expert, p X5
Classic D&D (little brown book) also shows this hop, however
L Title HD Combat Spells by Level
1 Acolyte 1 man - - - - - -
2 Adept 2 man 1 - - - - -
3 Village Priest 3 2 men 2 - - - - -
4 Vicar 4 3 men 2 1 - - - -
5 Curate 4+1 3 men 2 2 - - - -
6 Bishop 5 Hero -1 2 2 1 1 - -
7 Lama 6 Hero 2 2 2 1 1 -
Men & Magic, p. 18. Level numbers added for clarity
It's likely a typo in the OD&D rules, and matches Cook's Expert, but note that both of those are different from Moldvay, where level 6 has no 3rd level spells.
By AD&D PH, it was fixed:
L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 1 - - - - - -
2 2 - - - - - -
3 2 1 - - - - -
4 3 2 - - - - -
5 3 3 1 - - - -
6 3 3 2 - - - -
7 3 3 2 1 - - -
Gygax, AD&D Player's Handbook, p. 20
Likewise, in Mentzer:
L 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 - - - - - -
2 1 - - - - -
3 2 - - - - -
4 2 1 - - - -
5 2 2 - - - -
6 2 2 1 - - -
7 3 2 2 - - -
I contacted a friend with Holmes basic; it covers ONLY levels 1-3; while it has 2nd level clerical spells, it has no provisions for characters to cast them.
S&W
Swords and Wizardry includes this jump because it was in the game it clones: classic D&D in it's brown or white cover era. S&W makes only a couple changes mechanically. None of them are in character capability, only in resolution mechanics, and the most notable being ascending AC, which is mathematically equivalent.
If you want to "fix" it
If you want a smoother progression, the following is a better fit with later lines on the chart for Classic, Moldvay, and Cook, and by extension, S&W:
L Title Spells
1 Acolyte - - - - -
2 Adept 1 - - - -
3 Priest (Priestess) 2 - - - -
4 Vicar 2 1 - - -
5 Curate 2 1 1 - -
6 Elder 2 2 1 1 -
7 Bishop 2 2 2 1 1
I penciled this into a copy of Cook Expert some time around 1982...
From the Core Rulebook under the Cleric class in Chapter 3: Each cleric must choose a time when she must spend 1 hour each day in quiet contemplation or supplication to regain her daily allotment of spells. By daily allotment this refers to all their spells.
From the Core Rulebook under Divine spells in Chapter 9: When preparing spells for the day, a cleric can leave some of her spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes. During these extra sessions of preparation, she can fill these unused spell slots ... Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if she prepares more than one-quarter of his spells.
In summary:
- All spells = 1 hour
- Some spells = 15 minutes per 1/4 of your slot allotment
Best Answer
Wisdom: Prime Requisite versus Spell Casting Ability
The thing that originally made Clerics different was the prime requisite being the Wisdom score. Druids, being a sub-class of Cleric, were along for the ride.
TL;DR: originally, to differentiate the (hybrid) Cleric from the (pure)Magic User and the (pure)Fighting Man
How? Via the prime requisite assigned to the character class (and its later sub classes).
From the older editions forward ...
Since you ask about older editions, I present a mild frame challenge. Wisdom as a spell casting ability was not the original concept. It didn't show up in full until the d20 system/D&D 3e, though you can see how it was getting there as the editions progressed. Wisdom was the Cleric class, and Druid sub class, prime requisite.
The original purpose of prime requisites was as an experience point bonus generator.
The original three PC classes (OD&D) were made different by what the prime requisite was for each (Men and Magic, p. 10):
These prime requisites didn't originally apply bonuses beyond XP bonus for higher than average scores. When the first supplement was published (Greyhawk, 1975) bonuses in combat for high Strength accrued to the fighter, and a "spells known" limitation/bonus for Magic Users based on Intelligence score was presented. Wisdom at that point hadn't been fleshed out in the same manner. Any character's prime requisite still boosted experience in class. All ability scores were in play to help the DM / referee make calls on how well a character could do "something" he tried to do.
Why Wisdom?
To make Clerics different from Magic Users and Fighters. The Cleric was the original form of a fighter/magic user (for humans) as distinct from pure Fighter or pure Magic User. (Men and Magic, p. 7)
The Cleric also introduced a way to fold medieval religion's social influence into the campaign. (M&M, p. 7: the kinds of followers a cleric attracts at name level (Patriarch) includes 10-60 Turcopoles, who arrive at a cleric's stronghold to serve The Cause. Is that cool or what?)
Wisdom as an experience point bonus provider: in OD&D, Men and Magic (Vol 1, TSR, 1974, pp. 10-11). If your cleric had a 13 or better Wisdom, you gained experience 5% faster; if you had a 16 Wisdom or better, 10% faster.
Wisdom gets more consideration: AD&D 1e
Wisdom got a bump in importance, and you could see the beginning of the idea behind "spell casting ability", in AD&D. (1e AD&D, PHB p. 11; language quite similar in 2e).
Compare that to Intelligence, (1e PHB p. 10)
Similar but different.
As you can see, from the early editions, the distinction morphed from "to differentiate the classes" into the difference between raw intelligence and common sense, judgment, and intuition. (Aside: I've met a lot of very smart folks with little common sense and poor judgment.) Since Clerics and Magic Users got their spells via very different means, the distinction was complementary. (You didn't have to be smart to cast clerical magic, just faithful and at least a little bit wise/of sound judgment. You had to be smart to learn, memorize, and cast magic user spells -- a feature of the Vancian Magic in the game).
What changed for Wisdom in AD&D 1e? The XP bonus was preserved, but a threefold upgrade arrived, and progress towards what later became "spell casting / spell related ability":
This fleshing out of Wisdom provided the Cleric a boost in effectiveness analogous to the boost that Fighters got for very high strength. The exceptional strength / damage table in the original game's Greyhawk supplement (more or less core OD&D) did not have a similar boost for Clerics. All ability scores got more adjustments and more relevance in AD&D 1e (which were retained in 2e). You saw a similar smoothing out of the ability based bonuses in Basic (Moldvay) and BECMI (Mentzer). They both benefited from AD&D "lessons learned." Even so, the original author found the other characteristics less easily tweaked than strength.
@Chemus pointed out (thank you) that only Wisdom provided bonus spells until 3d edition. That made it unique. While I always suspected that this was done as an incentive to get people to play clerics, I can't produce the article I read {back when dirt was new} to support that.
Why Wisdom and why not Charisma?
Charisma, in OD&D, 1e and 2e, was not a spell casting ability for anyone, nor was it a prime requisite. It was a leadership and influence ability, as seen on page 11 of Men and Magic (bonuses for morale and loyalty base). In the early era the game was very much a campaign. In OD&D in particular, and to a certain extent in 1e, it was expected that you would have both hirelings and henchmen whose loyalty / willingness to follow you was in play. (My 2e play did not involve hirelings/henchmen at all, other campaigns might have). That design principle reaches back to Chainmail miniatures rules where morale checks were a big deal in determining whether or not your troops would keep on fighting, or break and run, during a battle when bad things happened during the fighting. (Having a Hero or Superhero around would improve a morale check.) Morale checks made it into OD&D and AD&D.
That ability got an expanded definition in AD&D:
What about the Druid?
Druids have had Wisdom as a prime requisite since their introduction as a playable class (OD&D, Eldritch Wizardry, 1975) established Druids as a sub-class of Cleric (this carried into AD&D). Interestingly, you had to roll at least a 14 Charisma to qualify as one, but only a minimum of 12 Wisdom, yet you got no spell casting boost for that Charisma. What's up with that?
Part of "why" is in the leadership elements of Charisma. This in part can be traced back to
1) how little anyone actually knows about druids and
2) the little that was known being that they were leaders in their societies.
From Greyhawk, we see the original NPC/Monster Druid (p. 34)
Their origin was as a combined magical / clerical leader of barbarians / berserkers. Charisma did nothing for your spell casting ability, but with loyalty and morale checks being a thing in OD&D and AD&D, being charismatic was deemed more important for the "less civilized" society of the original Druid than for the "civilized" cleric.
To further complicate matters, when TSR introduced new classes with special features, like Paladin or Druid or Ranger, they generally required higher minimum ability scores to have a chance at playing the special class. (That design theory has since been abandoned).
So, all of that exposition considered, why Wisdom?
To differentiate between pure fighter, pure magic user, and a class (cleric)that could do a little of both.
Charisma was for leadership and personal skills, not spell casting.
Intelligence was chosen for Magic Users, so something else had to be / was chosen to make the distinction between classes for advancement purposes. Wisdom was it.
Things morph/change a bit at a time.
While the original premise for using Wisdom for Clerics didn't include spell casting amplification, it took a step in that direction in AD&D with bonus spells and access to the highest spell levels for high Wisdom clerics. The d20 system/3e is where the prime requisite was let go. You can recognize the spell casting ability approach in the spell casting classes and the use of DC's, and things like the requirement for a minimum wisdom score of 10 to even be a cleric. (Having played an OD&D Cleric with a 9 wisdom ... I guess Donias Requiem would not have qualified in 3e. thwack)
Each edition has carried over some previous edition material, and changed some. You could fairly say that the reason Wisdom remains as the prime spell casting ability for Clerics (and Druids) is either inertia, tradition or a bit of both.
What about the Bard?
In the two earliest editions, the bard did not fit in too well, but came into its own as a Rogue sub-class in 2e. In 1e it was still a variant character covered in an Appendix II:
A bard must have scores of 15 or better in the following abilities: strength, wisdom, dexterity and charisma. Furthermore, a bard must have at least a 12 score in intelligence and a 10 in constitution.
The bard did not get spell bonuses from Charisma. You could derive from the scores necessary that the minimum Intelligence requirement covered the Bard's magic use.
Prime Requisites Matter, even according to the game authors.
About the matter of getting an above average score as motive to pursue a particular class. @timster points out that a related factor is the old "roll 3d6 in order" character generation method.
The XP bonus in OD&D / AD&D was carried on in the Moldvay Basic Rules by adopting the penalties to XP gain for low ability scores.
That system kept the Ability Score Adjustment from OD&D in a slightly different form. The book flat out told you to seek a class where you had a decent prime requisite.
If you didn't roll well, you could still pursue a higher prime requisite.
All that Wisdom did in that system was provide improved magic based saving throws. It did not boost spell casting.
Min-maxing gained momentum, in pursuit of more XP. When you are rolling 3d6 in order, this rule set provided an opportunity to pick a character class that the dice had not, that day, been inclined to grant you. The OD&D trade-offs were not as clean, but had set the table for this approach.