What do you think?
Rate this book
Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book
Dorothy Lathrop's Animals of the Bible won the very first Caldecott Medal when it was originally published in 1937. Now, in honor of the sixtieth anniversary of this prestigious medal and its first recipient, comes this special deluxe edition of Lathrop's award-winning collection of some of the Bible's most extraordinary animals. Thirty richly detailed black-and-white drawings illustrate the favorite stories of the Creation, Noah's Ark, the first Christmas, and many others. A glorious tribute to a great tradition in children's literature, this special anniversary edition will be a keepsake to treasure for years to come.
72 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1937
12 people are currently reading
375 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 216 reviews
July 8, 2020
So while I from a sense of aesthetics do very much appreciate that Dorothy P. Lathrop won the very first Caldecott Medal (in 1938) for her visually stunning artwork, I also do not really think that Helen Dean Fish's Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book would be something all that appealing to and for the target audience, to and for younger children (the so-called picture book crowd) and that yes, Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book might well even be a trifle unsuitable.
But my issues with Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book are in fact not AT ALL with its Judeo-Christian themes and contents but mostly with the fact that the presented King James Bible passages Helen Dean Fish uses in Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book are in my humble opinion much too dense, much too complicated and intricate for younger children. For while I actually very much adore the King James Bible and consider it both a personal favourite and a literary masterpiece, Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book would indeed have been very much confusing and annoyingly tedious if I had had this picture book read to me as a child (and even if I had tried to read Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book on my own as a child). Because even if the King James Bible passages encountered in Animals of the Bible: a Picture Book are indeed beautifully expressive and full of much literary delight and merit, they really do NOT in my opinion work all that well in a picture book, they are just too difficult and too convoluted for use with, for reading to young children (and really, Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book is therefore and in my opinion more a Bible-themed picture book for adults, as it really does kind of fail as reading or listening fare for children, for anyone below the age of around at least twelve or even thirteen).
But even with Dorothy P. Lathrop's Caledcott Medal winning illustrations, I also tend to find some of her accompanying pictures (even though I have personally found them all visually spectacular) potentially problematic with regard to how suitable they might be for younger children, since especially Lathrop's depictions of serpents (Eve with the serpent and in particular the gaping and almost frothing snake jaws of Leviathan) could well be frightening (indeed, with Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book, those two serpent illustrations would have totally freaked me out as a child). And while therefore I can and do appreciate Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book in an of itself, as a picture book, I do consider it not all that suitable for children and even not really meant for children either.
But my issues with Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book are in fact not AT ALL with its Judeo-Christian themes and contents but mostly with the fact that the presented King James Bible passages Helen Dean Fish uses in Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book are in my humble opinion much too dense, much too complicated and intricate for younger children. For while I actually very much adore the King James Bible and consider it both a personal favourite and a literary masterpiece, Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book would indeed have been very much confusing and annoyingly tedious if I had had this picture book read to me as a child (and even if I had tried to read Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book on my own as a child). Because even if the King James Bible passages encountered in Animals of the Bible: a Picture Book are indeed beautifully expressive and full of much literary delight and merit, they really do NOT in my opinion work all that well in a picture book, they are just too difficult and too convoluted for use with, for reading to young children (and really, Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book is therefore and in my opinion more a Bible-themed picture book for adults, as it really does kind of fail as reading or listening fare for children, for anyone below the age of around at least twelve or even thirteen).
But even with Dorothy P. Lathrop's Caledcott Medal winning illustrations, I also tend to find some of her accompanying pictures (even though I have personally found them all visually spectacular) potentially problematic with regard to how suitable they might be for younger children, since especially Lathrop's depictions of serpents (Eve with the serpent and in particular the gaping and almost frothing snake jaws of Leviathan) could well be frightening (indeed, with Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book, those two serpent illustrations would have totally freaked me out as a child). And while therefore I can and do appreciate Animals of the Bible: A Picture Book in an of itself, as a picture book, I do consider it not all that suitable for children and even not really meant for children either.
January 9, 2018
Hmmm. I would say, read this book if you want to read all the Caldecott medal books. Otherwise, let this book rest in the past. It is only to be recognized as part of this medal process.
The book uses pages of text to tell bible story in the King James version. The pictures are black and white which is fine. The drawings are very beautiful and well done, but they are almost like what a picture can take with a little of the artists imagination in there. The pictures were enjoyable. It felt like they slapped some bible text up on the page that has something to do with an animal and then they gave the picture of an animal.
The text was so old, after looking through this, I didn't even show it to the kids. The first Caldecott medal didn't hold up to time very well. That makes me wonder about the stuff I love in my generation, will it stand up to time and bore future listeners/readers/watchers to death in the future. Probably - maybe - hopefully not.
I'm still glad I'm reading all the Caldecott and going back through history to see and understand how they thought. I will continue on through this year.
The book uses pages of text to tell bible story in the King James version. The pictures are black and white which is fine. The drawings are very beautiful and well done, but they are almost like what a picture can take with a little of the artists imagination in there. The pictures were enjoyable. It felt like they slapped some bible text up on the page that has something to do with an animal and then they gave the picture of an animal.
The text was so old, after looking through this, I didn't even show it to the kids. The first Caldecott medal didn't hold up to time very well. That makes me wonder about the stuff I love in my generation, will it stand up to time and bore future listeners/readers/watchers to death in the future. Probably - maybe - hopefully not.
I'm still glad I'm reading all the Caldecott and going back through history to see and understand how they thought. I will continue on through this year.
January 4, 2014
Along with the Children's Book Group, I am reading through the Caldecott winners beginning with the first winner, Animals of the Bible. I was surprised to find that the illustrations are black and white drawings! It's striking though I admit I felt a little disappointed. I'm not sure if it's just the printing I have, but a few of the illustrations looked a little "blown out" like there was a bit of fading or something. For example, "Balaam's Ass", the angel looks rather fadeded in places, the wings don't have a lot of detail, etc. I'm not sure if this is intentional.
The art (it really feels like art) is quite beautiful, and it is clear that Lathrop knew animals well--they are quite realistically portrayed. This is such a contrast from many of the picture books of today that are not only very colorful but also often more fanciful in their interpretation of animals.
I'm not sure how much the art would appeal to children of today, but I could definitely appreciate the work. I am reminded of the Little House books and how Laura was always so interested in looking at the illustrations in Pa's book of animals. I imagine that especially for children of yesteryear, many of whom would never see these animals move on the big or small screen, let alone get to see them in person, it would be very exciting to see them represented in these illustrations.
The art (it really feels like art) is quite beautiful, and it is clear that Lathrop knew animals well--they are quite realistically portrayed. This is such a contrast from many of the picture books of today that are not only very colorful but also often more fanciful in their interpretation of animals.
I'm not sure how much the art would appeal to children of today, but I could definitely appreciate the work. I am reminded of the Little House books and how Laura was always so interested in looking at the illustrations in Pa's book of animals. I imagine that especially for children of yesteryear, many of whom would never see these animals move on the big or small screen, let alone get to see them in person, it would be very exciting to see them represented in these illustrations.
September 6, 2025
This is a neat idea, going through the Bible and pulling all of the passages with animals. Illustrations are in black and white and very realistic (you just might want a marker to add some filler, if you’re like me).
Hard to believe this is a book quoting the Bible (the KJV, no less) and it won the Caldecott Medal for that year. Different times…
Ages: 4 - 12
Here’s my carefully curated Bible stories list: watch my reel!
Content Considerations: Eve’s breasts are exposed and detailed! Behemoth is pictured as a hippo? Baby Jesus is naked - nothing visible. A child is naked - nothing visible.
**Like my reviews? Then you should follow me! Because I have hundreds more just like this one. With each review, I provide Content Considerations, mentioning any objectionable content I come across so that parents and/or conscientious readers (like me) can determine beforehand whether they want to read a book or not. Content surprises are super annoying, especially when you’re 100+ pages in, so here’s my attempt to help you avoid that!
If you’re considering a book or looking for a new title to read, check out my highly categorized shelves, read my reviews and Friend or Follow me to spiff up your feed with clean, wholesome, living books.
I have an Instagram account that’s pretty bookishly unique too!
Hard to believe this is a book quoting the Bible (the KJV, no less) and it won the Caldecott Medal for that year. Different times…
Ages: 4 - 12
Here’s my carefully curated Bible stories list: watch my reel!
Content Considerations: Eve’s breasts are exposed and detailed! Behemoth is pictured as a hippo? Baby Jesus is naked - nothing visible. A child is naked - nothing visible.
**Like my reviews? Then you should follow me! Because I have hundreds more just like this one. With each review, I provide Content Considerations, mentioning any objectionable content I come across so that parents and/or conscientious readers (like me) can determine beforehand whether they want to read a book or not. Content surprises are super annoying, especially when you’re 100+ pages in, so here’s my attempt to help you avoid that!
If you’re considering a book or looking for a new title to read, check out my highly categorized shelves, read my reviews and Friend or Follow me to spiff up your feed with clean, wholesome, living books.
I have an Instagram account that’s pretty bookishly unique too!
February 22, 2023
This book must, MUST be looked at in historical concept to give a fair review.
By today's standards we're not impressed with the text (of which there feels to be too much, in archaic language no less) and the lack of color on the pages. We've been spoiled by modern printing practices I fear. And also, the ease of which various Bible translations abound to make God's word easier to understand.
This book was first printed in 1937. The nation is still in the Great Depression. In fact, it's been going on long enough that we have to consider the sheer miracle that there were still children's picture books being printed. At this time there were too ways the publisher could have gone with this book. The first was to do color - lavish and beautiful - for a very very small audience who could afford that. OR, they could go black and white and make this book cheaply so that it would be accessible by a wider range of people. Given the nature of the book, I have to respect the choice of black and white over color. Because of this, even poorer families could have this book, to be able to enjoy God's word with copious illustration.
That said - the style? The animals were beautiful. The illustrator has a fine hand with birds especially, but the detail is amazing. Sadly the skill does not extend to the humans who look flat and strange. For this I'm dropping a star because I truly do wish they could have found an illustrator who could have done both.
Also, the Bible verses chosen feel like too much taken out of context. We get random verses that come out of nowhere and only offer up an animal reference for common ground. The reason I'm not taking a star here is because there again, look at this historically. The majority of households were very Christian at this time. Children would have been attending church weekly (more than one service was common) and so hearing scriptures read in this exact way since they were born. With the familiarity of the text there's no need to give more context - this is familiar ground. The point here is to give enough which for the time period I feel it did.
My last point is that I've seen in the reviews many complaints over the archaic language. I dug around a little and found out that there really wasn't a lot of choice in English version of the Bible at this time. In fact, the NIV which is the one we're most familiar with (though the NASB and a handful of other translations are equally well used) wasn't even started until 1954. So if you wanted Bible verses, you had King James. Period. Yes, there were some other translations but they weren't in wide use at the time, and licensing might have restricted their use (even today you can't use the NASB without paying huge royalties to the publisher for the privilege). So this text is what was available.
For the modern reader this is a difficult book to like. Was it a good choice for the Caldecott? Not knowing what it was up against it's hard to say. But given the time period and the limitations of that time period, I would declare this a fine book that filled a need in a way that the most people could enjoy. Maybe for that alone it's worth the medal.
By today's standards we're not impressed with the text (of which there feels to be too much, in archaic language no less) and the lack of color on the pages. We've been spoiled by modern printing practices I fear. And also, the ease of which various Bible translations abound to make God's word easier to understand.
This book was first printed in 1937. The nation is still in the Great Depression. In fact, it's been going on long enough that we have to consider the sheer miracle that there were still children's picture books being printed. At this time there were too ways the publisher could have gone with this book. The first was to do color - lavish and beautiful - for a very very small audience who could afford that. OR, they could go black and white and make this book cheaply so that it would be accessible by a wider range of people. Given the nature of the book, I have to respect the choice of black and white over color. Because of this, even poorer families could have this book, to be able to enjoy God's word with copious illustration.
That said - the style? The animals were beautiful. The illustrator has a fine hand with birds especially, but the detail is amazing. Sadly the skill does not extend to the humans who look flat and strange. For this I'm dropping a star because I truly do wish they could have found an illustrator who could have done both.
Also, the Bible verses chosen feel like too much taken out of context. We get random verses that come out of nowhere and only offer up an animal reference for common ground. The reason I'm not taking a star here is because there again, look at this historically. The majority of households were very Christian at this time. Children would have been attending church weekly (more than one service was common) and so hearing scriptures read in this exact way since they were born. With the familiarity of the text there's no need to give more context - this is familiar ground. The point here is to give enough which for the time period I feel it did.
My last point is that I've seen in the reviews many complaints over the archaic language. I dug around a little and found out that there really wasn't a lot of choice in English version of the Bible at this time. In fact, the NIV which is the one we're most familiar with (though the NASB and a handful of other translations are equally well used) wasn't even started until 1954. So if you wanted Bible verses, you had King James. Period. Yes, there were some other translations but they weren't in wide use at the time, and licensing might have restricted their use (even today you can't use the NASB without paying huge royalties to the publisher for the privilege). So this text is what was available.
For the modern reader this is a difficult book to like. Was it a good choice for the Caldecott? Not knowing what it was up against it's hard to say. But given the time period and the limitations of that time period, I would declare this a fine book that filled a need in a way that the most people could enjoy. Maybe for that alone it's worth the medal.
August 19, 2019
The Caldecott Medal, named for nineteenth-century English artist Randolph Caldecott, is the premier children's illustration prize in the United States, and was first awarded in 1938. Animals of the Bible, which pairs quotations from the King James Bible, edited and presented by Helen Dean Fish, with black and white artwork by Dorothy P. Lathrop, was the first book to win the Caldecott. It is an advanced, text-heavy picture-book, and profiles many of the important animals of both the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Gospels, from the serpent who beguiled Eve, and the dove which Noah released from his ark, to the Palm Sunday colt, and the manger animals that were present during the Nativity. Each animal that appears in the biblical passage quoted, is then depicted in the accompanying illustration.
Less of a biblical storybook than a biblical sampling - perhaps it can be considered a young person's reference? - Animals of the Bible is not a title I would have picked up, in the normal course of events. Although interested in the ways in which these stories have been retold for children (I wish I remembered the name of collection I had myself, as a young girl!), as well as in the original text itself, a book which features brief biblical snippets paired with artwork is not really how I would have chosen to approach the subject. Having recently decided to read the entire Caldecott corpus, however (because clearly I don't have enough themed reading projects going already!), I picked it up this past weekend at the library, and discovered (perhaps not so surprisingly) that I was a bit disappointed with the first Caldecott. The quotations were fine, of course - the King James Bible, even when inaccurate as a translation, is quite beautiful - and the artwork was interesting. But being familiar with Lathrop's fairy-tale work - the illustrations she contributed to some of Walter de la Mare's books, for instance - I was not as impressed as I'd hoped to be. I'll have to see if The Fairy Circus , for which Lathrop won a Newbery Honor in 1932, and which I hope to read in the next few weeks for another ongoing project, is any better.
Less of a biblical storybook than a biblical sampling - perhaps it can be considered a young person's reference? - Animals of the Bible is not a title I would have picked up, in the normal course of events. Although interested in the ways in which these stories have been retold for children (I wish I remembered the name of collection I had myself, as a young girl!), as well as in the original text itself, a book which features brief biblical snippets paired with artwork is not really how I would have chosen to approach the subject. Having recently decided to read the entire Caldecott corpus, however (because clearly I don't have enough themed reading projects going already!), I picked it up this past weekend at the library, and discovered (perhaps not so surprisingly) that I was a bit disappointed with the first Caldecott. The quotations were fine, of course - the King James Bible, even when inaccurate as a translation, is quite beautiful - and the artwork was interesting. But being familiar with Lathrop's fairy-tale work - the illustrations she contributed to some of Walter de la Mare's books, for instance - I was not as impressed as I'd hoped to be. I'll have to see if The Fairy Circus , for which Lathrop won a Newbery Honor in 1932, and which I hope to read in the next few weeks for another ongoing project, is any better.
October 19, 2013
1.5 stars if rated without consideration to the time when it was published.
3 stars if I imagine myself as a child reading this book in 1937.
I was pleased to find the very first Caldecott Medal winner in our library. The illustrations are accompanied by several passages from the King James Version of the Bible that mention animals. The selected passages are, for the most part, a good selection, but modern translations of the Bible are much more readable and understandable by children and adults alike. The black and white illustrations are interesting to me. The animals’ bodies, fur, horns, whiskers, etc have some nice detail and structure but their faces and eyes seem strangely human-like. The humans are all drawn as “Greek deities” with perfectly shaped bodies and faces. While the book would not hold up to scrutiny today, the illustrations are wonderful for the time in which they were drawn and I can imagine that having such a book would be a special treasure for a child in 1937. It is a valuable use of time to spend some time with this piece of American literary culture and history.
3 stars if I imagine myself as a child reading this book in 1937.
I was pleased to find the very first Caldecott Medal winner in our library. The illustrations are accompanied by several passages from the King James Version of the Bible that mention animals. The selected passages are, for the most part, a good selection, but modern translations of the Bible are much more readable and understandable by children and adults alike. The black and white illustrations are interesting to me. The animals’ bodies, fur, horns, whiskers, etc have some nice detail and structure but their faces and eyes seem strangely human-like. The humans are all drawn as “Greek deities” with perfectly shaped bodies and faces. While the book would not hold up to scrutiny today, the illustrations are wonderful for the time in which they were drawn and I can imagine that having such a book would be a special treasure for a child in 1937. It is a valuable use of time to spend some time with this piece of American literary culture and history.
December 9, 2017
This was the very first book to be awarded the Randolph Caldecott Medal for the “most distinguished American picture book for children.”
Dorothy Lathrop’s black and white illustrations are wonderful. It is clear that she has experience drawing animals from real life. From the creation to Noah’s Ark, Daniel in the lion’s den, and on to the new testament, the drawings are detailed and life-like. Lathrop also took pains to include accurate depictions of the flora of the area depicted.
So why only one star?
The book was conceived and planned by Helen Dean Fish, who selected the texts used from the King James Bible. In some cases, the animal is but a small mention in the text (Abraham’s Ram or Jonah and the Great Fish). She did nothing to write these as child-friendly stories. I cannot imagine a child sitting still for any of these verses. If I needed a child’s picture book of Bible stories, I’d pick a different book.
That’s really a pity, because Lathrup’s drawings are magnificent. I’d rate the illustrations 5***** - but I still wouldn’t recommend the book.
Dorothy Lathrop’s black and white illustrations are wonderful. It is clear that she has experience drawing animals from real life. From the creation to Noah’s Ark, Daniel in the lion’s den, and on to the new testament, the drawings are detailed and life-like. Lathrop also took pains to include accurate depictions of the flora of the area depicted.
So why only one star?
The book was conceived and planned by Helen Dean Fish, who selected the texts used from the King James Bible. In some cases, the animal is but a small mention in the text (Abraham’s Ram or Jonah and the Great Fish). She did nothing to write these as child-friendly stories. I cannot imagine a child sitting still for any of these verses. If I needed a child’s picture book of Bible stories, I’d pick a different book.
That’s really a pity, because Lathrup’s drawings are magnificent. I’d rate the illustrations 5***** - but I still wouldn’t recommend the book.
April 30, 2015
There are no colors in the book other than on the outside front and back cover, which I think would take away from the books appeal. This book has a different topic on each page. That topic consists of all different animals. Each page, a new animal is introduced to the ongoing story. The story, are different passages in the bible. I did not care much for this book. It was definitely interesting and would be a good book for children to read or have read to but only a couple animals at a time. I think this book had a lot going on at once, lots of information for one sitting. I could barely get through it. The illustrations could use some work. I think that overall, this book would be good spread out over a few reading sessions but it was just too much and hard to continue with while reading it in one go.
December 26, 2017
This book pointed out animals I forgot about. Lovely pictures.
September 28, 2018
This was the first book to receive the Randolph Caldecott Medal. It was published in 1937 and awarded in 1938.
Historically speaking, this book speaks for the time period that it was written during and I don't doubt its specialness that it carried at that time.
The text is straight out of the King James version Bible. It has thirty-one animals, pulled from various passages of scripture, with black and white pictures to accompany the biblical references.
Although I don't feel that this is a book that has stood the test of time, it has been interesting to view it with a historical mindset. I must admit though, I was a tad shocked at the illustration that exposed a nude breasted Eve!
Note: I loved how this book won the Caldecott Medal and it's basically just a book with passages from the Bible. The Bible always has and will be the most precious book to own and read. Unfortunately, I think the book's illustrations are it's weakness when viewed with a contemporary eye.
Historically speaking, this book speaks for the time period that it was written during and I don't doubt its specialness that it carried at that time.
The text is straight out of the King James version Bible. It has thirty-one animals, pulled from various passages of scripture, with black and white pictures to accompany the biblical references.
Although I don't feel that this is a book that has stood the test of time, it has been interesting to view it with a historical mindset. I must admit though, I was a tad shocked at the illustration that exposed a nude breasted Eve!
Note: I loved how this book won the Caldecott Medal and it's basically just a book with passages from the Bible. The Bible always has and will be the most precious book to own and read. Unfortunately, I think the book's illustrations are it's weakness when viewed with a contemporary eye.
September 27, 2019
My library discard is a 17th printing and the quality of the illustrations is really disappointing. I'd like to find an edition in which I can see all the beautiful details of the original art for which this book won the Caldecott award.
February 15, 2013
This is the first book to win the Caldecott, awarded in 1938. It's interesting to see how the illustrated-book genre evolved from this point. This is certainly an illustrated book, but not of a story, since Animals of the Bible depicts selected Old and New Testament passages of the Bible that include or focus on an animal - that's the most innovative and compelling aspect. The book probably won't work with young children, especially since it uses the King James Version; if that translation is not an obstacle however, this may work as an alternate Bible story book. Lathrop's animals are well drawn and fell alive and full of motion and expression - the ram caught in the thicket at the time Abraham nearly sacrificed his son is one of the book's best. Her people don't fare so well - they are a bit stiff and two-dimensional, almost lifeless (some remind me of Erte's art deco style), which makes for an odd juxtaposition with the animals and flora - the sacrifice of Isaac doesn't fit this though, as his body and face express all the tension of the moment. 2.7 stars.
November 20, 2012
With over 30 stories from the New and Old Testament of the Bible, these stories touch on Creation, Noah's Ark, Christmas and many more. While I agree with the beliefs from this book, I don't think I would use this book to tell these stories.
This was probably my least favorite picture book that I have read from Caldecott winners as there were no colors and the illustrations seemed dull because of it. While I appreciated the drawings, it did not captivate me because of the lack of color. Similar to my generations’ reaction towards black and white movies, children would have similar responses to this book. There is a lack of consistency amongst images and the amount of text making it frustrating to go through. The picture book is large enough to be read in sections; however, there are not clear sections of division. Readers see illustrations for the next section while some sections have none.
This was probably my least favorite picture book that I have read from Caldecott winners as there were no colors and the illustrations seemed dull because of it. While I appreciated the drawings, it did not captivate me because of the lack of color. Similar to my generations’ reaction towards black and white movies, children would have similar responses to this book. There is a lack of consistency amongst images and the amount of text making it frustrating to go through. The picture book is large enough to be read in sections; however, there are not clear sections of division. Readers see illustrations for the next section while some sections have none.
June 26, 2012
A real low point for the Caldecott Award. If I was not determined to read every Caldecott Medal winner, I would certainly not give any attention to this book. I will give credit to Dorothy Lathrop for her fine illustrations. But simply inserting excerpts from the King James Bible and adding some nice drawings does not add up to anything exceptional.
I find it interesting that Helen Dean Fish had two Caldecott winners in the inaugural year (Honor and Medal) in which she simply collected biblical verse and nursery rhymes without any original text. It seems like she was simply riding on the coattails of superior illustrators work and taking credit for it.
Considering this is a book meant for children, a simpler biblical translation would have been more appropriate, rather than the dry king James version. I suppose that would have been too much to ask for in 1937.
I find it interesting that Helen Dean Fish had two Caldecott winners in the inaugural year (Honor and Medal) in which she simply collected biblical verse and nursery rhymes without any original text. It seems like she was simply riding on the coattails of superior illustrators work and taking credit for it.
Considering this is a book meant for children, a simpler biblical translation would have been more appropriate, rather than the dry king James version. I suppose that would have been too much to ask for in 1937.
July 17, 2013
It was an intriguing experience to read the very first Caldecott Medal winning title. Why did the committee choose this one? What else was published that year? I feel like the Caldecott Medal has evolved a great deal since this first winner. I was surprised at how static the illustrations seemed in this book-- most are contained in rectangles, and only a couple span two pages. There is no interaction with the text at all. On the other hand, I can see how these illustrations might have caught the eye of the committee. They're beautifully stylized with an Art Deco feel, especially in the human figures, and I can see the influence of Japanese prints in the composition and use of negative space in many of the illustrations.
I think my favorite is the illustration that accompanies "As a Hen Gatherth Her Chickens." "God's Care of the Animals" also stands out to me.
I think my favorite is the illustration that accompanies "As a Hen Gatherth Her Chickens." "God's Care of the Animals" also stands out to me.
January 16, 2014
First Caldecott award winner.
This contains black and white illustrations that illustrate a number of Biblical stories. The artwork is wonderful. the animals are realistically portrayed, and the drawings are quite detailed. This is a picture book, but it is not a book you would read in one sitting with young children. I have read one or two stories a day with my children. It uses text from the King James Version of The Bible, which is my preferred version. However, for those unfamiliar with this version it may be somewhat challenging for modern children who have had little exposure to the Bible. I found it beautiful.
This contains black and white illustrations that illustrate a number of Biblical stories. The artwork is wonderful. the animals are realistically portrayed, and the drawings are quite detailed. This is a picture book, but it is not a book you would read in one sitting with young children. I have read one or two stories a day with my children. It uses text from the King James Version of The Bible, which is my preferred version. However, for those unfamiliar with this version it may be somewhat challenging for modern children who have had little exposure to the Bible. I found it beautiful.
June 28, 2016
Updated: at the time it was written, this must have been a magnificent book. It provides insight into the American Library Association's commitment to picture books that can be read and reread with new enjoyment each time.
2010: This was the first book to win the Caldecott, and within a year, the next winner (mei li) was significantly better. Animals are cool, the bible is cool, but this book is unimpressive. In other news, children's books must have sucked in 1937 if this is the best of the best.
2010: This was the first book to win the Caldecott, and within a year, the next winner (mei li) was significantly better. Animals are cool, the bible is cool, but this book is unimpressive. In other news, children's books must have sucked in 1937 if this is the best of the best.
September 7, 2011
I teach at a Catholic school so this book was a great choice for me. The pictures in this book are amazing and full of detail. I did not think that my students would be very interested in the pictures because they were not in color but the illustrator really brings depth and interest to the pictures through shading and detail. This book is broken up into stories from both the old and new testaments. The stories are placed chronologically the way that they would be found in the Bible. The author also tells us where we can find these stories in the Bible.
September 2, 2015
The first Caldecott winner is a series of drawings depicting (what do you know!) animals of the Bible, alongside sections of text from the King James translation.
The illustrations are black and white, with a simple beauty and elegance. The animals are darling, and there were several pictures that I would not mind having prints of, like Eve with the Serpent, or the behemoth, or Rebekkah watering the camels. The composition of each illustration is very good--each one could hold its own on a gallery wall.
The illustrations are black and white, with a simple beauty and elegance. The animals are darling, and there were several pictures that I would not mind having prints of, like Eve with the Serpent, or the behemoth, or Rebekkah watering the camels. The composition of each illustration is very good--each one could hold its own on a gallery wall.
June 18, 2013
KJV text coupled with illustrations of the animals in the story. Illustrations are pretty good, but this was book will not find the same audience today. For one, even children like mine who are familiar with the Bible don't read it in the KJV. Interesting to see the first Caldecott, but, sadly, not one I'm going to rush out and buy. It would be cool to see someone do an update of this title, though.
January 2, 2012
I can admire the detail on some of the animals in this book. Some of them have wonderful expression in their eyes. I found the people in the lithographs less personable and interesting in terms of the art.
As a text, I didn't find this anthology of Bible stories and verses to hang together very cohesively.
As a text, I didn't find this anthology of Bible stories and verses to hang together very cohesively.
January 22, 2012
Book offered some unintentional laughs. Definitely from a different era.
October 2, 2018
A must have for religious children! With many excerpts from both the old and the new testament, Lathrop uses amazingly detailed lithographs to illustrate the animals mentioned in the Bible. This biblical bestiary is truly a work of art, with its honest illustrations paired alongside passages from the birth of Christ, genesis, and other well-known stories about figures such as Elijah and Daniel. Interestingly enough, the Leviathan makes an appearance, proving that in the eyes of 1930s readers in this book, it was just as real as any other animal one may see. Great for grades 2-5.
Review cross-listed here!
Review cross-listed here!
March 8, 2025
The illustrations are gorgeous. Although the King James translation can be a little confusing, it’s also beautiful language and worth hearing once in a while. This is probably not a book to read all the way through in one sitting with a young child. It’s a lot more than your average picture book. But to read a section or two and then talk about it would be very nice.
January 5, 2018
I really liked this book. The illustrations where well done. The stories were taken right from the King James Bible. This book is a great raw view of animals from the bible.
January 5, 2014
Realizing that this was the first Caldecott winner and as such was published in 1938, I was expecting the book to be in black and white, so I wasn't disappointed in that. I personally loved the illustrations. I found myself flipping through the book and recognizing most of the accompanying Bible stories.
I loved Lathrop's realistic depictions of the animals. I found myself even laughing when I turned the page to Job's Behemoth and found a hippo with a great gaping mouth! He was probably my favorite, along with Isaac's camels at Rebekah's well.
The people, however were not my favorite. I realize that the time frame in which the book was published as well as the author's personal background of study influenced the drawings with both the Art Nouveaux and Japanese styles. Neither of which is exactly my favorite artistic rendering.
As for the text, it is just quotes from the KJV Bible, which is the version I prefer and grew up reading as a kid. I agree that it is more difficult to understand, but the prose is so beautiful that I find myself missing it when reading newer translations. I do think, however, that the illustrations could easily be moved to any other book of Bible stories and retain their charm.
Overall, considering the time period and the fact that few children's books existed that weren't preachy or used to teach manners or morals, this was a great choice to be considered for the medal. I was unable to get either of the Honors from the year, though and wish I was able to compare those as well.
I loved Lathrop's realistic depictions of the animals. I found myself even laughing when I turned the page to Job's Behemoth and found a hippo with a great gaping mouth! He was probably my favorite, along with Isaac's camels at Rebekah's well.
The people, however were not my favorite. I realize that the time frame in which the book was published as well as the author's personal background of study influenced the drawings with both the Art Nouveaux and Japanese styles. Neither of which is exactly my favorite artistic rendering.
As for the text, it is just quotes from the KJV Bible, which is the version I prefer and grew up reading as a kid. I agree that it is more difficult to understand, but the prose is so beautiful that I find myself missing it when reading newer translations. I do think, however, that the illustrations could easily be moved to any other book of Bible stories and retain their charm.
Overall, considering the time period and the fact that few children's books existed that weren't preachy or used to teach manners or morals, this was a great choice to be considered for the medal. I was unable to get either of the Honors from the year, though and wish I was able to compare those as well.
November 18, 2016
Why animals?
This is the first book ever to win a Caldecott Medal, and it definitely shows its age. It is very wordy. It's just a bunch of passages from the Bible that depict animals, or even mention animals in passing or in metaphor. Most of them are illustrated by pictures of the animals. Some of the more interesting ones are "behemoth," which is apparently a hippopotamus, "leviathan", which is some kind of bizarre sea serpent, Jonah and the "great fish", which is clearly a baleen whale, and Jesus's saying that "the foxes have holes" apparently warrants a depiction of foxes. There's a picture of Jesus riding what is obviously a donkey, although it is described as a "colt" in the text. Also included is the cock which crows after Peter has denied Jesus three times.
But not, for example, the she-bears that maul children for mocking Elisha, or the plague of locusts. Only good animals. The nice animals are depicted here. That's it. Nothing really that interesting. There's no discernible moral to it. There's no obvious reason that they chose to illustrate animals. There's no point they seem to be making. It's just weird.
For more children's book reviews, see my website at http://www.drttmk.com.
This is the first book ever to win a Caldecott Medal, and it definitely shows its age. It is very wordy. It's just a bunch of passages from the Bible that depict animals, or even mention animals in passing or in metaphor. Most of them are illustrated by pictures of the animals. Some of the more interesting ones are "behemoth," which is apparently a hippopotamus, "leviathan", which is some kind of bizarre sea serpent, Jonah and the "great fish", which is clearly a baleen whale, and Jesus's saying that "the foxes have holes" apparently warrants a depiction of foxes. There's a picture of Jesus riding what is obviously a donkey, although it is described as a "colt" in the text. Also included is the cock which crows after Peter has denied Jesus three times.
But not, for example, the she-bears that maul children for mocking Elisha, or the plague of locusts. Only good animals. The nice animals are depicted here. That's it. Nothing really that interesting. There's no discernible moral to it. There's no obvious reason that they chose to illustrate animals. There's no point they seem to be making. It's just weird.
For more children's book reviews, see my website at http://www.drttmk.com.
November 21, 2017
This book is a story with multiple different passages apart of it. The stories inside involve many different animals from the bible. There are numerous stories from the most known animal stories the bible has. There are also a few stories with animals from the bible that people haven’t usually heard about. The illustrations are very detailed but also all in black and white. I was a little surprised to see the black and white illustration but I think that it aspect adds room for creativity. The detail also helps the reader understand the stories being told. Although I like this story I’m not sure if children today would enjoy this book as much as older generations. It sometimes was a bit of a slow read for me, therefore I did not enjoy this book that much. I think this book could be a more fun way for religious families to introduce stories from the bible to their children. Other than that I am not sure if this is a book I would recommend.
November 21, 2017
This children’s book is full of short stories that reveals the bibles beautiful and exotic animals. They are all short stories that can either be read to children, or children can read aloud. Though it is a religious book, it is beautifully written. It has such rich detail in the text and the illustrations. The pictures were so elegant and it made the book so much more fun to read. The pictures are in black in white which represents the timeless stories that are told in this book. The details go on and on, and can open a child’s imagination so much. Each page has the same sense of elegance and richness to it because of the illustrations. I love how this book is in black and white because it makes the pictures that much more interesting to try and interpret. I'm not sure I would have this book in my classroom simply because it does talk about religion, and not everyone is religious. But it is a great read and I loved the book!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 216 reviews