That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet—It would not be practical to determine with precision what kind of musical instruments are denoted by the words used in this verse. They were, doubtless, in many respects different from those which are in use now, though they may have belonged to the same general class and may have been constructed on substantially the same principles. A full inquiry into the kinds of musical instruments in use among the Hebrews may be found in the various treatises on the subject in Ugolin’s “Thesau Ant. Sacra.” tom. xxxii. Compare also the notes at Isaiah 5:12. The Chaldee word rendered “cornet”—קרנא qar^enâ'—the same as the Hebrew word קרן qeren—means a “horn,” as, for example, of an ox, stag, or ram.

It then means a wind instrument of music resembling a horn, or perhaps horns were at first literally used. Similar instruments are now used, such as the “French horn,” etc.

Flute—משׁרוקיתא mash^erôqı̂ythâ'. Greek, σύριγγός suringos. Vulgate, fistula, pipe. The Chaldee word occurs nowhere else but in this chapter ([Reference Daniel 3:5],[Reference Daniel 3:7],[Reference Daniel 3:10],[Reference Daniel 3:15]) and is in each instance rendered “flute.” It probably denoted all the instruments of the pipe or flute class in use among the Babylonians. The corresponding Hebrew word is חליל châlı̂yl. See this explained in the notes at Isaiah 5:12.

The following remarks from the Editor of the “Pictorial Bible” explain the usual construction of ancient pipes or flutes:

“The ancient flutes were cylindrical tubes, sometimes of equal diameter throughout, but often wider at the far end than the near end, and sometimes widened at that end into a funnel shape, resembling a clarinet. They were always blown, like pipes, at one end, never transversely; they had mouthpieces, and sometimes plugs or stoppers, but no keys to open or close the holes beyond the reach of the hands. The holes varied in number in the different varieties of the flute.

In their origin they were doubtless made of simple reeds or canes, but in the progress of improvement they came to be made of wood, ivory, bone, and even metal. They were sometimes made in joints, but connected by an interior nozzle which was generally of wood. The flutes were sometimes double, that is, a person played on two instruments at once, either connected or detached; and among the Classical ancients the player on the double-flute often had a leather bandage over his mouth to prevent the escape of his breath at the corners. The ancient Egyptians used the double-flute.”

Illustrations of the flute or pipe may be seen in the notes at Isaiah 5:12. Very full and interesting descriptions of the musical instruments used among the Egyptians may be found in Wilkinson’s “Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians,” vol. ii. pp. 222-327.

Harp—On the form of the “harp,” see the notes at Isaiah 5:12. Compare Wilkinson, as quoted above. The harp was one of the earliest musical instruments invented ([Reference Genesis 4:21]). The Chaldee word used here is not the common Hebrew word for the harp (כנור kinnôr), but is a word that does not occur in Hebrew—קיתרוס qayth^erôs. This occurs nowhere else in Chaldee, and it is manifestly the same as the Greek κιθάρα kithara—and the Latin cithara, denoting a harp.

Whether the Chaldees derived it from the Greeks, or the Greeks from the Chaldees, however, cannot be determined with certainty. It has been made an objection to the genuineness of the book of Daniel that the instruments referred to here were instruments bearing Greek names. See Introduction to chapter, Section II. IV. (c) (5).

Sackbut—Vulgate, Sambuca. Greek, like the Vulgate, σαμβύκη sambukē. These words are merely different forms of writing the Chaldee word סבכא sabb^ekâ'. The word occurs nowhere else except in this chapter. It seems to have denoted a stringed instrument similar to the lyre or harp. Strabo affirms that the Greek word σαμβύκη sambukē—“sambyke,” is of barbarian, that is, of Oriental origin.

The Hebrew word from which this word is not improperly derived—סבך sâbak—means “to interweave, to entwine, to plait,” as, for example, branches; and it is possible that this instrument may have derived its name from the “intertwining” of the strings. Compare Gesenius on the word. Passow defines the Greek word σαμβύκη sambukē—sambuca (Latin)—to mean a triangular-stringed instrument that made the highest notes or had the highest key, but as an instrument which, on account of the shortness of the strings, was not esteemed as very valuable and had little power.

Porphyry and Suidas describe it as a triangular instrument, furnished with cords of unequal length and thickness. The Classical writers mention it as very ancient and ascribe its invention to the Syrians. Musonius describes it as having a sharp sound; and we are told that it was often used to accompany the voice in singing Iambic verses—Pictorial Bible. It seems to have been a species of triangular lyre or harp.

Psaltery—The Chaldee is פסנתרין p^esantērı̂yn. Greek, ψαλτήριον psaltērion; Vulgate, psalterium. All these words manifestly have the same origin, and it has been on the ground that this word, among others, is of Greek origin, that the genuineness of this book has been called in question. The word occurs nowhere else but in this chapter ([Reference Daniel 3:5],[Reference Daniel 3:7],[Reference Daniel 3:10],[Reference Daniel 3:15]).

The Greek translators often use the word ψαλτήριον psaltērion—psaltery—for נבל nebel—and כנור kinnôr; and the instrument referred to here was doubtless of the harp kind. For the kind of instrument denoted by the נבל nebel—see the notes at Isaiah 5:12. Compare the illustrations in the Pictorial Bible on Psalms 92:3.

It has been alleged that this word is of Greek origin, and hence an objection has been urged against the genuineness of the book of Daniel on the presumption that, at the early period when this book is supposed to have been written, Greek musical instruments had not been introduced into Chaldea. For a general reply to this, see the Introduction, section I, II, (d). It may be remarked further, in regard to this objection:

That it is not absolutely certain that the word is derived from the Greek. See Pareau, l.c. p. 424, as quoted in Hengstenberg, “Authentic des Daniel,” p. 16.
It cannot be demonstrated that there were no Greeks in the regions of Chaldea as early as this. Indeed, it is more than probable that there were. See Hengstenberg, p. 16 and following.

Nebuchadnezzar summoned to this celebration the principal personages throughout the realm, and it is probable that all known forms of music, whether of domestic or foreign origin, would have been gathered on such an occasion.

Dulcimer—סומפניה sûmpôn^eyâh. This word occurs only here and in Daniel 3:10 and Daniel 3:15. In the margin it is rendered “symphony” or “singing.” It is the same as the Greek word συμφωνία sumphōnia—“symphony,” and in Italy the same musical instrument is now called by a name of the same origin, zampogna, and in Asia Minor zambonja.

It probably corresponded to the Hebrew עוגב ‛ûgâb, rendered “organ,” in Genesis 4:21;[Reference Job 21:12];[Reference Job 30:31]; and Psalms 150:4. See the notes at Job 21:12. Compare the tracts on Hebrew musical instruments inscribed schilte haggibborim in Ugolin, Thesau. vol. xxxii. The word seems to have had a Greek origin and is one of those on which an objection has been founded against the genuineness of the book.

Compare the Introduction, Section I. II. (c). The word “dulcimer” means “sweet” and would denote some musical instrument characterized by the sweetness of its tones.

Johnson (Dictionary) describes the instrument as one that is “played by striking brass wires with little sticks.” The Greek word would properly denote a concert or harmony of many instruments, but the word here is evidently used to denote a single instrument. Gesenius describes it as a double pipe with a sack: a bagpipe.

Servius (on Virgil, Aeneid xi. 27) describes the “symphonia” as a bagpipe, and the Hebrew writers speak of it as a bagpipe consisting of two pipes thrust through a leather bag and affording a mournful sound. It may be added that this is the same name which the bagpipe had among the Moors in Spain; and all these circumstances concur to show that this was probably the instrument intended here.

“The modern Oriental bagpipe is composed of a goatskin, usually with the hair on, and in the natural form, but deprived of the head, the tail, and the feet; being thus of the same shape as that used by the water-carriers. The pipes are usually of reeds, terminating in the tips of cows’ horns slightly curved; the whole instrument being most primitively simple in its materials and construction.”—“Pictorial Bible.”

And all kinds of music—All other kinds. It is not probable that all the instruments employed on that occasion were actually enumerated. Only the principal instruments are mentioned, and among them those which showed that instruments of foreign origin were employed on the occasion.

From the following extract from Chardin, it will be seen that the account here is not an improbable one and that such things were not uncommon in the East:

“At the coronation of Soliman, king of Persia, the general of the musketeers, having whispered for some moments in the king’s ear, among several other things of lesser importance, gave out that both the loud and soft music should play in the two balconies upon the top of the great building which stands at one end of the royal palace, called “kaisarie,” or imperial palace.

No nation was dispensed with, whether Persians, Indians, Turks, Muscovites, Europeans, or others; which was immediately done. And this same “tintamarre,” or confusion of instruments, which sounded more like the noise of war than music, lasted twenty days together, without intermission or interruption by night; this number of twenty days was observed to correspond to the young monarch’s age, who was then twenty years of age,” p. 51; quoted in Taylor’s “Fragments to Calmet’s Dictionary.” No. 485.

It may also be observed that in such an assemblage of instruments, nothing would be more probable than that there would be some having names of foreign origin, perhaps names whose origin was to be found in nations not represented there. But if this should occur, it would not be proper to set the fact down as an argument against the authenticity of the history of Sir John Chardin; nor, similarly, should the similar fact revealed here be regarded as an argument against the genuineness of the book of Daniel.

Ye shall fall down and worship—That is, you shall render “religious homage.” See these words explained in the notes at Daniel 2:46. This shows, that whether this image was erected in honor of Belus or of Nabopolassar, it was designed that he in whose honor it was erected should be worshipped as a god.

Charles Ellicott Commentary Daniel 3:5

Daniel 3:5

Daniel 3:5

SCRIPTURE