Читать книгу A Manual for Teaching Biblical History - Eugene Kohn - Страница 3

Table of Contents

Purpose of Manual. In recent years some attention has been given to the improvement of Jewish educational method so far as instruction in the Hebrew language is concerned, but the teaching of Biblical history, although it holds an important place in the curricula of our religious schools, has received relatively little attention from our educators, at least from those of orthodox and conservative tendencies. From the reform point of view some recent publications, though exhibiting the faults which all early efforts in any direction necessarily show, do mark a decided pedagogic advance on the older unmethodical way in which the subject was taught. But from the point of view of traditional Judaism they are inadequate, however helpful some of their pedagogic suggestions may be, since they are guided by a different ideal. This manual attempts to assist the teacher of Biblical history from the point of view of Traditional Judaism. For whoever considers from this point of view the way in which Biblical history is taught must come to the conclusion that not only are we not realizing to the full the educational values which the study of Biblical history affords, but we are often giving our children very false notions of the Bible characters and of the lessons which the story of their lives is intended to teach Israel. To develop a good course of study in Biblical history cannot be the work of one man nor can it be done at one time. It is hoped however that the suggestions contained in this book may assist the earnest teacher to make his instruction more fruitful of good results for Judaism.

Three factors determining method of instruction. Every discussion of pedagogic method as applied to a particular branch of study must take three factors into consideration: the aim of instruction, the subject to be taught, and the child—his mode of thought, interests and capacity.

The Aim. The first thing that we must bear in mind is that the aim of all Jewish education must be a Jewish life; that the aim of each branch of Jewish study must be formulated not primarily in terms of information to be conveyed, but of Jewish habits of thought and action to be cultivated. It follows that Biblical history as taught by a Jew who believes in the authority of the Torah and the mitzvoth over our lives must be very different from the same subject as taught by one to whom Judaism is merely a number of moral maxims and the dogma of the unity. This book, attempting as it does to treat the problem from the point of view of traditional Judaism, considers that the main object of instruction in Biblical history is to inspire the child with an appreciation of the religious ideals that have moulded Israel's life in the past, with an understanding of how these same ideals express themselves in the religious institutions of the present day, and with the desire to further the historic aims of Israel's existence through identification with the institutional life of Israel, that is through the observance of the mitzvoth, affiliation with the synagogue, etc. Particularly must we create in the child the sense of his personal identity with his people, for this is the lever by which the events of the Biblical narrative can move the Jew to active interest in Judaism. He must feel that God's choice of Israel means that God has chosen him to live a certain life, the life of the Torah, and that if he fails to live this life, he sins against God and betrays his people. He should feel proud of the heroes of his nation and inspired with a sense of the obligations that his noble descent imposes. He must be made to discover the spiritual kinship that links him with the rest of Israel in the past, present and future. Unless we can accomplish this we have not succeeded in our teaching of Biblical history.

Wrong and right conception of aim illustrated. A lack of appreciation of these aims has often led to the treatment of the Biblical narrative as if it were merely a series of moral stories or, at any rate, of stories into which a moral can be read. According to this method the connection of the Jewish people today with the people of the Bible is almost wholly ignored and there is no appreciable difference in the way the events of the Biblical narrative are taught and, let us say, the incidents of some highly moral fairy tale or folk-lore of other peoples. To give an example I quote the following summary of a lesson on "Moses' Return to Egypt":

"So then we can learn these two noble things from our lesson; modesty adorns everybody even the greatest people, yes very often the greatest people are the most modest. And further, when we have begun to do something, let us do it with all our might and stick to it till it is finished, no matter what it is, whether a school lesson or setting a people free; whatever is worth doing at all is worth doing well."

One could imagine the same moral attached to the story of George Washington or of Cincinnatus and brought home as effectively by it. The difference between the right and the wrong method of treating the Biblical narrative from the point of view of the aim of such instruction can be seen if we contrast the above with the simple summary of the same lesson in the Passover Haggadah:

"Slaves were we unto Pharaoh in Egypt and the Lord our God brought us forth thence with a strong hand and with an outstretched arm. And if the Holy One, Blessed be He, had not brought forth our fathers from Egypt behold we and our children and our children's children might still be bondmen to Pharaoh in Egypt." And again: "In every generation one is obliged to regard himself as if he in person had come forth from Egypt, as it is said, 'And thou shalt tell thy son in that day saying, It is because of that which the Lord did for me when I went forth from Egypt.' Not our fathers alone did the Holy One, Blessed be He, redeem but us also did He redeem with them, as it is said, 'And us did He bring forth thence in order to bring us hither to give us the land which He had sworn to our fathers.'"

According to the method of the former quotation Biblical history is no more related to the child than the story of the Iliad, according to the latter it is his own history, the study of which helps him to self knowledge, to the knowledge of his Jewish self, the knowledge of the ties that bind him to his fellow Jews and the Jewish people to its God. Much more might be said of the effect upon the method of instruction of a clear conception of the aim of instruction in Biblical history when thus conceived in terms of Jewish life, but a study of the lessons given in this book will suffice to explain this without the need of further amplification, so we may pass to the consideration of the subject-matter to be taught as a determining factor in the method of instruction.

The subject-matter: Biblical history. I have throughout referred to the subject-matter under the name not of Jewish history but of Biblical history and I have done so advisedly. For the term Jewish history does not commit one to that interpretation of the early history of our people which is to be found in the Bible. From the Jewish point of view the Bible, in its narrative portions as well as in its laws, is Torah, that is authoritative teaching. It does not merely recall the early events of Jewish history but it takes a distinct attitude to these events, seeing in them the revelation of a divine purpose; it not only tells the deeds of Biblical heroes but it passes judgment upon them, here approving and there disapproving; and it is precisely this attitude to Jewish history, this interpretation of the significance of historic events, which must be made an influence in the life of the child. If we were merely teaching Jewish history as such and looked upon the Bible merely as the source book of this history we might tell the story of the Exodus somewhat in this fashion:

"The children of Israel who had at the beginning of their sojourn in Egypt been well treated by the Egyptian rulers, owing to a change of dynasty were subjected to oppression and forced to do servile labor for the Pharaohs. They took advantage however of a series of calamities that visited Egypt, which their leaders Moses and Aaron interpreted to the Egyptians as signs of the divine wrath incurred by her because of her oppression of the Israelites, and so left Egypt in a body."

The above account is Jewish history but it is not Biblical history for it has nothing to say about the significance of these events as the Bible regards them. It does not tell us that Moses was sent by God, it does not know anything of the covenant with Abraham of which these events are the fulfillment, it does not therefore see in the Exodus one link in a chain of events having its beginning in the election of Abraham and its consummation in the revelation at Sinai. In the Biblical narrative what is most conspicuous is the Eẓba Elohim, "the finger of God," in the merely historic account this may altogether be omitted.

Must give Biblical moral to Jewish history. Very few teachers in our Jewish schools, if any, would make the mistake of teaching the events narrated in the Bible merely as cold facts without any attempt at giving them religious significance, though frequent efforts at rationalization tend in this direction. For the most part, the aim in teaching the early history of our people is felt to be a religious one and to call for a religious interpretation of the events recorded. We are not loath to attach a moral to the stories we tell our children, but where we fail is that we imagine any moral which we can read into the story is satisfactory. We have already shown how the consideration of the aim of instruction in Biblical history, from the point of view of traditional Judaism, opposes this method and limits the moral which should be taught in connection with any given story, but the consideration of the subject-matter to be taught limits it still further. We must not only give a Jewish moral to each episode in the Biblical narrative but we must give the child the specific moral that the Bible itself attaches to that episode. If we take our Bible seriously, if we regard its interpretation of the events of our history as essentially true, as indeed part of the Torah, a divine revelation, then it becomes our duty to give this interpretation of events and not another to our children. We sometimes excuse to ourselves the perversion of the Biblical moral on the ground that because children are children they frequently cannot grasp what is really the Biblical lesson. If in any given instance this is the case, it is better not to teach that story at all to the child than to falsify it. But usually the ideas of the Bible can be brought home to the child if we but take the trouble to translate them into the language of childhood and illustrate them out of the child's own experience. It is largely due to indolence on the part of the teacher that we so frequently sin against the Biblical sense of a story. I have heard the story of Abraham's divorce of Hagar told as if it were a mere family squabble in which Sarah, by shrewish persistence finally prevails upon the meek and submissive Abraham somewhat reluctantly to send away Hagar, who had aroused her jealousy. Abraham was made a rather doubtful hero who represented the virtue of loving peace—peace at any price as the narrative showed—and Sarah was regarded as acting in a mean and ungodly capacity. Had that teacher read her Bible carefully and intelligently before coming to class she could not have been guilty of such grotesque distortion of the Biblical story, by which it is made not only trivial but ludicrous. She would then have realized that Ishmael had to be separated from Isaac for the same reason that Lot had to be separated from Abraham and Esau from Jacob, because they were not of the seed from which Israel was destined to spring; that even before the birth of Ishmael we have the prophecy told to Hagar, "And he shall be a wild ass of a man; his hand shall be against every man and every man's hand against him" (Genesis 16. 12). She would have observed that in the words of the Rabbis "Abraham was subordinate to Sarah in prophecy", that just as Isaac showed a mistaken preference for Esau so Abraham when the birth of Isaac is predicted to him pleaded, "Oh that Ishmael might live before thee!", and that the Bible recognizes the superior prophetic insight of Sarah by telling us that God commanded Abraham explicitly, "Let it not be grievous in thy eyes because of the lad and because of thy bond-woman; in all that Sarah may say unto thee, hearken to her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." Surely, though the story undoubtedly presents difficulties of a pedagogic nature, it is not impossible to teach a child that God foresaw that Ishmael would be a "pere adam" (a wild ass of a man), that he did not wish the chosen people, who were to inherit the promised land, to be possessed of such traits, and that therefore Ishmael had to be sent away so that Isaac and his descendants might become the great people he had promised Abraham they would become. In this way the Bible speaks for itself and tells a story that is quite as intelligible to the child as the one that the teacher I have mentioned told, quite as intelligible and infinitely more edifying. I have given this instance at some length because it seems to me typical of the mischief that can be done by reading into the Biblical narrative any moral that may come to hand instead of the moral that the Bible itself intended.

Need of Bible study for teacher. This manual will endeavor in each lesson to point out to the best of its author's understanding what the Biblical moral of the lesson is. But, as interpretations are always subject to differences of opinion, a study of the suggestions contained in its chapters cannot relieve the teacher of the responsibility of a careful independent study, before entering the class-room, of the Biblical passages whose story he wishes to teach.

The child as determining method. And after he has mastered for himself the meaning of the Biblical narrative, he must study how to impart this to the child in a way that shall make it not only comprehensible but interesting, and all this without sacrifice of the aim of instruction. An adequate treatment of method in teaching Biblical history from the point of view of the interests and capacities of the Jewish child is at present impossible. We need years of study and experimentation in this direction before we can do it complete justice, but a few universally recognized pedagogic principles may briefly be considered here in their bearing upon our subject. We have spoken of the need of effort on the part of the teacher to make the lesson comprehensible and interesting, and we shall therefore give some attention to two questions: (1) How can the lesson be made comprehensible? (2) How can it be made interesting? We shall treat the questions separately for the sake of convenience, though, as a matter of fact, they are inseparable; for neither can a child be expected to interest himself in what he cannot understand nor can he be made to understand anything that involves the least difficulty without giving that sustained attention which only interest can elicit from him.

How to make lesson comprehensible. Proceed from known to unknown. The most important rule to bear in mind in order to make the teaching comprehensible is the familiar truism that one must proceed from the known to the unknown and keep constantly defining the unknown in terms of what is already known to the child. As is the case with most truisms, the truth of this statement is more frequently recognized than applied. Take for instance the very first sentence in one of the Biblical histories intended for the use of children. It reads, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, that is the whole visible world." Was there ever a human being who did not know what heaven and earth meant and yet knew what the whole visible world meant? Contrast with this the following from another text-book:

"Once a long, long time ago there was no one living on this earth that is now so full of people.

"There were no living things at all here: no cattle, no wild beasts, no birds, no butterflies or insects of any kind and no fishes in the sea.

"Before that there were no green growing things here; no grass, no trees, no flowers.

"In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.

"In the beginning was a time so long ago that no one knows when it was."

How much better is this way of beginning the story of creation from what the child has experienced of created objects than to begin with non existence and chaos. Few of us realize how many terms that are commonplaces with us mean nothing to the child. Particularly is this true of terms used in the Bible and descriptive of things familiar in the primitive orient but little known in the modern occident, such as altar, sacrifice, tabernacle, caravan, to name but a few.

Avoid formal definition. But at this point a word of caution is necessary against a too pedantic application of this principle of defining the terms that are used in the child's instruction. For example one book of Bible stories for young children prefixes to the story of creation a vocabulary which includes explanations of such words as ground, dark, light, sky, under, above, good, rest. But it must be apparent that a child who cannot without previous explanations understand such simple words as these is not in a position to profit by instruction in Biblical history at all. It is possible so to overload a story with definitions that the whole thread of the narrative is lost. We must be cautious lest our pupils fail to see the forest by very reason of the trees. Ample allowance must be made for the constructive imagination of the child, which builds up its own definitions out of the material of the narrative itself. Children have always had an understanding of fairy tales without ever having had the terms fairy, witch, king and princess defined for them. When you tell a child that the king sat on a high throne with his crown on his head, his sceptre in his hand, while all the people bowed down to him, the child, though he has never seen a throne, will recognize that it is something on which kings sit, that a crown is something that a king wears on his head, a sceptre something that a king holds in his hand, and that a king is a man who is distinguished from other men and to whom they bow, a very good working definition of a king which would make quite unnecessary any elaborate attempt to define for a child the concept of royalty. In fact, formal definition should be avoided wherever possible, and the skilful teacher will know how to make a story define its own terms in the same way as the sentence that we just gave as an instance defined for the child the four unknown terms: king, throne, crown, and sceptre. Indeed the most important idea of all, that we have to give to the child cannot be defined otherwise even to ourselves, namely the idea of God. The general rule to be followed may be laid down in these words: Never define for the child any term that the story itself can be made to define but do define every necessary term that the story itself cannot be made to define. It is worth while noting in this connection that the best definition for a concrete object is the object itself or a picture of it.

How to make the lesson interesting. Oral instruction preferable. So much for the question how to make the lesson comprehensible to the child. As has already been said, this in itself goes a great way toward answering as well our second question, how to make it interesting, but other considerations must also be taken into account. The art of teaching history is in great part the art of story telling. Children love stories and particularly true stories if they are well told, but this love of a child for a good story is limited, especially in earlier years, to a story that is told. The mere technical difficulties of reading, the physical inconvenience of the posture demanded, the absence of that commentary which voice and gesture supply to the story, the impossibility of asking a book questions, and a number of other similar considerations make it undesirable that the first acquaintance of a child with a lesson shall come from a text-book. Text-books have their uses, particularly in the higher grades, for purposes of review, to aid the memory in retaining what has already been taught by word of mouth, but the practice that obtains in some schools of expecting the child to learn the lesson from the book before he comes to class is bad and should be avoided.

Some suggestions as to story telling. If then the first presentation of a lesson must be given orally by the teacher, it follows that the teacher has to perfect himself in the art of story telling. Like all other arts, the art of story telling cannot be imparted by rule and particularly not within the small scope of this introduction. A few suggestions however may be helpful. Lewis Carrol, whose Alice in Wonderland shows a rare insight into the childish mind, makes his Alice express a preference for books with plenty of illustrations and conversation. There are two hints here that are of value to the teacher of Biblical history, the first is to use pictures to illustrate a story and the second always to prefer direct discourse to indirect. To take up the second of these suggestions first, compare the following accounts of the same event and ask yourself which appeals more to you:

1. Then Joseph could not refrain himself before all them that stood by him and he ordered every man to leave him. And there stood no man with him while Joseph made himself known to his brethren. And he wept aloud and the Egyptians heard and the house of Pharaoh heard. And Joseph told his brethren who he was and asked whether his father was yet alive. And his brethren could not answer him, for they were affrighted at his presence. Joseph told them to come near, and they came near, and he told them that he was Joseph whom they had sold into Egypt and that they should not be grieved nor angry with themselves for having sold him thither, for it was in order to preserve life that God had sent him before them. For the famine had been in the land for two years and there yet remained five years during which there would be neither plowing nor harvest, and so God had sent him before them to give them a remnant on the earth and to keep them alive for a great deliverance.

2. Then could Joseph not refrain himself before all them that stood by him; and he cried, "Cause every man to go out from me." And there stood no man with him when Joseph made himself known unto his brethren. And he wept aloud, and the Egyptians heard and the house of Pharaoh heard. And Joseph said unto his brethren, "I am Joseph; doth my father yet live?" And his brethren could not answer him for they were affrighted at his presence. And Joseph said unto his brethren, "Come near to me, I pray you." And they came near. And he said: "I am Joseph your brother whom ye sold into Egypt. And now be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to preserve life. For these two years hath the famine been in the land; and there are yet five years in which there shall be neither plowing nor harvest. And God sent me before you to give you a remnant on the earth and to save you alive for a great deliverance."

The reader will at once recognize in the second citation the exact language of the Bible. The first is the same passage turned into indirect discourse with no other change in its wording, yet how much it loses in force even for us adults and even in print; for children and in actual narration the story would lose even more.

The advantage of using illustrations. As for the advantage of using illustrations whether in the form of pictures that are distributed and passed around the class or in the form of stereoptican views, we have already suggested one advantage in that they help define for the child the meaning of some of the concrete terms not yet in his vocabulary, but they perform a still more important function in helping him to visualize the narrative. For what we see seems always a more intimate part of our experience than what we have merely heard. When Job wants to express the deeper intimacy of his new knowledge of God after God had appeared to him he declares, "I had heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth Thee." (Job 42. 5.)

When to use illustrations and what illustrations to use. Though the use of illustrations, particularly of stereoptican views, which have the advantage of focusing the attention of the class on one thing, are a decided help, they should be used only in reviewing the lesson. The reasons for this are: 1. that the picture distracts the attention of the class from what the teacher is saying, 2. that it prevents the smooth flow of narrative by the necessity of explaining details of the picture that are often irrelevant, 3. that the interest in the dramatic dialogue of the characters which reveals their motives and, in most cases, the actual moral of the story is sacrificed to the interest in picturesque details of dress, scenery, etc., 4. that the teacher is at the mercy of the artist's conception of the Biblical narrative which rarely does it justice from a Jewish or from an artistic point of view, and often does violence to the nobler conception of the story that the unaided imagination, stimulated by the teacher's narrative, would have constructed. Pictures that represent God in human form should of course not be allowed in a Jewish school. Nor should the school use such pictures as represent anything of a mystical character in images so definite and familiar that they dispel the whole mystical atmosphere. When, for instance, the revelation on Mount Sinai is represented by two tablets of stone falling from heaven into the waiting hands of Moses, as in one familiar picture, it is hardly likely to instil the highest form of reverence. Or when, as in another picture, the ascension of Elijah is represented by a chariot drawn by horses of a brilliant red, meant to suggest fire but too definite in outline to permit of such suggestion, the child will in all probability merely be amused at the peculiar color of the horses and the picture will not have illustrated the story for him at all. It is therefore apparent that the teacher must exercise some sort of censorship over the illustrations used in teaching.

Self activity of child. We have several times referred to the activity of the child's own imagination in working over in his mind the material supplied by the teacher, and the recognition of the fact that the child's mind is not passive but active leads us to the acceptance of a principle of the most far reaching importance in all education, namely, that the teacher cannot impart a lesson unless he can get the child's mind of its own accord to seek that very knowledge that he wishes to impart. This is the wisdom of the homely proverb, "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink." We must stimulate an appetite for the mental food we wish to give the pupil even before we give it. How can this be done?

Jewish symbols and ceremonies a stimulus to self activity. When discussing the aim of instruction in Biblical history we took a hint from the Haggadah for Passover, the reading of which was mainly intended for pedagogic purpose since it is in fulfillment of the commandment, "And thou shalt tell to thy son in that day"; we may take another hint from it in this connection. The child at table on Passover eve sees before him a number of curious objects and ceremonials to which he is not accustomed. He sees the maẓẓot, the maror, and other symbols, he also notices the reclining attitude instead of the usual erect posture, and so he very naturally exclaims mah nishtannah! "How different is this night from other nights!" Then when his own curiosity has been stimulated he is given the answer to his questions and the lesson has been impressed upon him. The symbols and ceremonies of Jewish life which have their origin or explanation in the Biblical narrative are excellently adapted for this stimulation of intellectual curiosity which should precede the telling of the story. A reference to the Sabbath and how it is observed might well precede the story of creation which explains its origin and significance; a reference to the Passover observances might well precede an account of the Exodus; a reference to the synagogue might precede an account of the construction of the tabernacle, etc. These serve the double function of interesting the child in the narrative and of interesting him in those things in Jewish life which the narrative helps to explain. Where an object of Jewish ceremonial life cannot be found with which to stimulate his curiosity, some other fact of his experience may be taken instead. Thus the story of Noah might well be introduced by reference to the rainbow, the meaning of which the teacher will then undertake to explain to the child by the story.

The teacher's question as a stimulus to self activity. Inasmuch as there are in every class those of the type mentioned in the Haggadah "who know not how to question", it often becomes advisable for the teacher himself to put to the class the question that he wishes to have answered. And indeed an occasional question from the teacher in the very midst of the story may go a great way toward arousing interest and securing a clearer comprehension. Thus it may be that the teacher is telling the story of Joseph. He reaches the point where Joseph's brothers come to him to buy corn and explains how Joseph, having recognized them without their having recognized him, had them wholly in his power. He then asks, "Now what do you think you would do if you were Joseph and your brothers had treated you so cruelly and then they come to you for food and you have them in your power?" At once he has the class interested in the question of what Joseph actually did and their interest in the rest of the story as well as their better comprehension of the motives that underlie it is secured.

The pupil's recitation. So much for the teacher's original presentation of the lesson. This completed, the child must be called upon to recite it, not primarily, as most teachers seem to think, in order to give the teacher a chance to find out whether the child had learned the lesson, but because the necessity of telling it over to the teacher forces the child to think about the subject of the lesson and once more appeals to his self activity. The questions asked by the teacher should not be merely such as call for items of information but such as require the exercise of intelligence on the pupil's part and give evidence not only of his remembering the story but of his understanding it. If for example the teacher wishes to question the child on the story of creation, such formal questions as "In how many days did God make the world? What did he make on the first day? What did he make on the second day?" etc., are not enough, as they test the memory only. He should ask such questions as these: "Why do we rest on the seventh day of each week? What was the last thing God made? Why did God make man last?" For these test not only the memory but the understanding as well. The story that the children tell when thus asked to repeat the lesson will give the teacher an idea of what points have impressed themselves on them and what have not, and on the basis of these he must question further. In general there ought to be fewer questions beginning with "what" and more beginning with "why".

Dramatization of lesson. Beside the repetition of the lesson by the child in the form of a recitation and the answering of questions, there are many stories, in which the interest centers chiefly in the dramatic dialogue, that children might be encouraged to dramatize in class. The dramatization must be made by the children themselves in the spirit of free play, the teacher merely offering general suggestions but the dialogue being the spontaneous creation of the children. The natural imitative instinct of children which makes so much of their play the mimicry of the activities and occupations of their adult environment, takes very kindly to this sort of make-believe. At the same time this exercise enables them to enter into the motives of the Biblical characters and to understand and remember the incidents of the Biblical narrative as few exercises can. Nor need the teacher be discouraged by the lack of accessories to dramatization such as scenery and costume. The child's imagination, which can convert a rocking chair into a boat or a table into a mountain, can easily dispense with those accessories which the sophisticated mind of the adult requires. Stories that lend themselves to such treatment are Esau's sale of the birthright, Isaac's blessing of Jacob and Esau and the various episodes of the Joseph narrative.

The teacher's preparation. It follows from the above discussion that the teacher of Biblical history who wishes to do justice to his subject must give careful preparation to each lesson, not only, as we have already suggested, with a view to understanding the significance of the Biblical passages that he wishes to teach, but also with a view to teaching them effectively to the child. This preparation must include 1. inquiry as to object in teaching that particular lesson to the child, 2. the effort to find some point of contact between the theme of the lesson and the previous knowledge and experience of the child such as would appeal to his interest, 3. the study of the subject from the point of view of literary and oratorical effectiveness in the presentation, 4. the attempt to find the best possible illustrations and applications of the lesson to the life of the child, 5. preparation of questions and other devices by which the child is made to work over the lesson in his own mind and give proof of having assimilated it. In the chapters of this manual the object of each lesson according to the author's opinion will be pointed out and suggestions will, from time to time, be given as to the other points that have been here enumerated. This book refrains, however, from giving a detailed plan of each lesson as it is deemed important not to put restraints on the originality and initiative of the teacher but on the contrary, to encourage free and spontaneous expression of personality both on the part of teacher and of pupil.

Summary. Much more might be said about the method of teaching Biblical history, but this will have to suffice by way of introduction to the more concrete suggestions that are to follow in the chapters of this book. It may be well, however, before closing to summarize the more important conclusions reached:

1. That the aim in instructing the child in Biblical history is not merely to teach him a moral such as he might learn from any edifying story but to influence his life through the consciousness of his spiritual identity with the Israel of the Bible;

2. That the events narrated must be given the same significance that the Bible itself gives them and not any convenient moral that we may wish to append to them;

3. That teaching shall be so adapted to the child as to make the lesson (a) comprehensible, (b) interesting;

(a) That in order to be comprehensible it must proceed from the known to the unknown and must define the unknown in terms of the known, avoiding however, so far as possible, all formal definition, and leaving large scope for the exercise of the child's imagination;

(b) That in order to be interesting the lesson should first be presented by the teacher orally in a style made vivid by plenty of conversation quoted directly, and that this may well be followed up by illustrations such as the showing of pictures or stereoptican views; that the teacher stimulate the curiosity of the child before beginning the lesson preferably by the introduction of some relevant object of Jewish ceremonial, but, in the absence of that, by some other appeal to the child's experience; and finally, that the teacher encourage self activity and self expression on the part of the child by tactful questions both in the course of presenting the lesson and when the child is asked, as he should be, to recite the lesson he has learned.

These suggestions it is hoped may prove of some help to the earnest teacher of Biblical history. In the chapters which follow, an attempt is made to give them more concrete and definite illustration. Each chapter will therefore contain 1. the interpretation of the subject-matter of the lesson, 2. a brief discussion of the aim in teaching it, and 3. miscellaneous suggestions as to the way it can best be made to appeal to the child.