That this instrument was really a harp is now very generally denied ; and Pfeiffer, Winer, and other writers on the subject, conclude that it was a kind of guitar. This is entirely grounded on somewhat uncertain etymological derivations. Thus 11= is in the Septuagint translated by ictOcipa and Kwtipa; and by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodo tion always by necfpa. Now the Greek cithara, it is argued, was a kind of guitar, from which the modern instrument so called, and its very name, gittare, guitar, is derived. The testimony of the Arabic is also adduced ; for the name among the Arabians for instruments of the guitar kind is tambtira, and it happens that this is the very term by which the word kinnor is rendered in the Arabic version. When this kind of argument was used by Pfeiffer and others, it was not well known that the guitar was in fact an ancient Egyptian, as it is also a modern Oriental, instrument. It is frequently figured in the monuments. There is therefore little room to doubt that the guitar was known to the Hebrews, and probably in use among them. Notwithstanding this kind of evidence, the editor of the Pictorial Bible (on Ps. xliii. 4) ventured to suggest the greater probability, that the lyre, in some of its various kinds, was denoted by the word kinnor; and subsequent inquiry has tended to establish this conclusion as firmly perhaps as the nature of the subject admits. It shown, first, that the cithara, which the Greek translators appear to have had in view, was in fact originally the same as the lyre ; in other words, the name Au pa, lyra, rarely occurs in the early Greek writers, that of KiOdpa being far more common. But, about the time of Pindar, certain innovations were introduced, in consequence of which the lyre and cithara came to be used as distinctive words—the lyre denoting the instrument which exhibited the strings free on both sides, and the cithara that with the strings partly drawn over the sounding body. This latter instrument, preserving the shape of the lyre, and wholly distinct in form and arrangement from the guitar, resembling it only in this one point, should surely not be confounded with it, especially as antiquity had another instru ment which more obviously belongs to the guitar species. If those who allege that the kinnor was a kind of guitar, mean merely that it was a species of lyre which in one point resembled a guitar, we do not differ from them ; but if they allege that it had any general resemblance to the modern instru ment, they remove it from the lyre class of instru ments, which the authorities on which they rely will not allow. If, therefore, the word KLOdpa denoted, when the Greek translators of the Bible lived, a species of lyre, which was the only lyre when the Hebrew Scriptures were written, it follows, that in using this word for the Hebrew kinnor, they understood and intended to convey that a lyre was signified. They also could not but know that the distinction between the lyra and cithara was of recent origin ; and as the latter word had originally been a general term for the lyre, they must have felt it to be more strictly equivalent than lyra to the Hebrew kinnor. It may also be observed that all the uses of the kinnor, as described in Scripture, were such as were applicable to the lyre, and to the lyre only, of all the ancient instruments of music ; most of them being egregiously inapplicable to the harp, and not very suitable to the guitar. And it must not be overlooked, that it is morally certain the Hebrews had the lyre, seeing that it was common among all their neighbours ; and yet there is no other of their instruments but the kinnor with which it can possibly be identified. The frequency of its occurrence in Scripture also corresponds with the preference given to it in most ancient writers. We are moreover inclined to place some reliance upon the Egyptian painting supposed to represent the arrival of Joseph's brethren in Egypt (No. 37S, fig. 4). Here one of the men is playing on a lyre of somewhat peculiar shape ; and if he be a Hebrew the instrument is undoubtedly a kinnor, as no other stringed instrument is mentioned till the time of David. This instrument has seven strings (the usual number of the lyre), which are partly drawn over the sounding body : this is the characteristic of that more ancient species of lyre called the cithara. The engravings 378 and 379 will give some idea of the varieties in form and strings which the lyre assumed among the Egyptians. There were probably similar differences among the He brews ; for in concluding the kinnor to be the lyre, we have no wish to restrict it to any one particular instrument : we rather apprehend that it was a general term for all instruments of the lyre kind. If there was one instrument more than another on which the Hebrews were likely to pride themselves, and which should be regarded as their national instrument, it is the kronor; and if they gave the figure of an instrument on any coin as a type of their nation, as the harp of Ireland, it would be this. Now the instrument which we do find on some coins ascribed to Simon Maccabmus is no other than a lyre (No. 383, fig. 3), and there can be little doubt that it was intended to represent the instrument known among the Hebrews by the name of kinnor. An instrument resembling the ancient lyre is also in use among the Arabians, bearing the name of kussir (derived perhaps from kithara). There is a figure of it in Niebuhr, and he saw no other instrument in the East which he felt disposed to identify with the harp of David' (Reisebesch. i. 179).
2. 11, 'Jebel, is the next instrument which re quires attention. The Greek va,f3Xlov (vcil3Xa, vcipX-q, intact, or vair3Xas) and the Latin nablium, ;labium (or nabla), are obviously connected with or derived from the same source as the Hebrew word, and may afford some help in our search after the instrument. The word is rendered psaltery' in the A. V., in imitation of the Sept. translation of the Psalms and Nehemiah, which renders it by tpaArOLov, with the exception of iliciXp.os in Ps. lxxi. 22, and raOapa in Ps. lxxxi. 2. The Sep tuagint in the other books in which the word occurs, renders it by pcifAcc, or with a different ending vdpov. As to when this instrument was invented, and when it came into use among the Hebrews, nothing can be determined with certainty. The first mention of it is in the reign of Saul (r Sam. x. 5), and from that time forward we continue to meet with it in the O. T. It is, however, not found in the 3d chapter of Daniel, where mention is made of so many instruments : whence we may infer either that it did not exist among the Baby lonians, or was known among them by another name. Indeed, among the Greeks and Latins the word nabliunt is not of frequent occurrence, and is only employed by the poets, who are generally fond. of borrowing foreign names. The use of the instru ment prevailed particularly in the public worship of God. David's own instrument was the but he neglected not the nebel. It was played upon by several persons in the grand procession at the removal of the ark (t Chron. xv. 16 ; xvi. 5) ; and in the final organization of the temple music it was entrusted to the families of Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun (1 Chron. xxv. 1-7) ; Asaph, however, was only the overseer of the nebelists, as he him self played on the n.1-65.n, metziltaim. Out of the worship of God, it was employed at festivals and for luxurious purposes (Amos vi. 5). In the manu facture of this instrument a constant increase of splendour was exhibited. The first we meet with were made simply of the wood of the berosh (2 Sam. vi. 5 ; i Chron. xiii. 8), others of the rarer algum tree (r Kings x. 12 ; 2 Chron. ix. It) ; and some perhaps of metal (Joseph. Antiq. i. 8. 3), unless the last is to be understood of particular parts of the instrument.
Conjectures respecting the probable form of this instrument have been exceedingly various. Passing by the eccentric notion that the nebel was a kind of bagpipe, we may assume, from the evident ten dency of the Scriptural intimations, and from the general bearing of other authorities, that it was composed of strings stretched over a wooden frame. This being assumed or granted, we must proceed to seek some hint concerning its shape ; and we find nothing more tangible than the concurrent testimony of Jerome, Isidorus, and Cassiodorus, that it was like the Greek letter A inverted, v.
The only instrument of this shape known to the older writers on the subject was the harp ; which some of them (as Calmet) on this insufficient ground inferred to be the instrument intended. But since then Vast additions to our knowledge of ancient musical instruments have been found in the tombs of Egypt and the buried cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii. From these we learn two things—that the ancient harp was not shaped like the Greek A inverted ; and that there were stringed instruments, something between the harp and the lyre, which in their various forms bore a remarkable resem blance to that letter (No. 38o). We feel assured that among these forms may be found the instru ment which the fathers had in view, for they lived while they were still in use. They held it to be the same as the Hebrew rebel; and as we can, through the Egyptian monuments, trace the instru ment up to early Scriptural times, this view cer tainly deserves considerable attention.
We are, however, far from thinking that the nebel was always of this shape. It appears to us to be a general name for various of the larger stringed instruments of the harp kind, and also to denote, in a more special sense, one particular sort : in other words, that the nebel was an instrument of a principal species, the name of which was applied to the whole genus. In fact, we have the names of several instruments which are generally conceived to be different varieties of the Hebei. Before pro ceeding to these, we must express an opinion that one of these kinds, if not the principal kind, or the one most frequently denoted by the word, was the ancient harp, agreeing more or less with that represented in the Egyptian monuments. Whether the 'Jebel or not, there can be little doubt that the Hebrews had such an instrument, although we may be unable to point out the precise word by which they described it. It is morally impossible that an instrument so common in Egypt, and of which the powers must have much exceeded that of any other instrument known to them, could have been neglected by a people whose stringed instru ments of music were so various as those of the Hebrews. It may further be observed, that the use of this instrument as shown in the Egyptian paintings, agrees in all respects with that which the Scriptures refer to the ;rebel, so far as we can gather any indications from them ; and it is some what remarkable that the two great harps, in what is called Bruce's tomb, have respectively eleven and thirteen strings, being only one more and one less than the twelve assigned by Josephus to the Imbed. These harps are shown in No. 381, and other varieties of the same instrument are figured in No. 382.