a special definition for KJV's use of word

I have found that at least two English dictionaries have a separate and unique definition for one word just for how it was used in the KJV. All sources including KJV-only sources seem to agree that the sackbut was a wind musical instrument.

The Oxford English Dictionary noted that the name sackbut was “not found as the name of a musical instrument earlier than the later half of the 15th century” (XIV, p. 333). The 1828 Webster’s Dictionary described the sackbut as “a wind instrument of music; a kind of trumpet.“ Laurence Vance acknowledged that “a sackbut is a medieval wind instrument” (Archaic Words, p. 296). D. A. Waite’s Defined KJB defined “sackbut” as “a medieval wind instrument, forerunner of the trombone” (p. 1170). James Knox wrote: “A sackbut is a brass wind instrument of music, like a trumpet, so contrived that it can be lengthened or shortened according to the tone required” (By Definition, p. 142). John Florio’s 1598 A World of Words is said to explain trombone as “a great sackbut, a great trump.“ The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible contended that “the sackbut was some kind of trombone, which did not exist in biblical times” (Vol. III, p. 476).

On the other hand, most sources affirm that the word in the original languages at Daniel 3:5 that was translated "sackbut" in the KJV referred to a stringed musical instrument.

That sets a little background for the special definition for "sackbut" that I found in two English dictionaries.

The 1970 Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary of the English Language (Unabridged) gives two different definitions for sackbut. Its first definition is “a medieval wind instrument, similar to the trombone.” Its second definition is as follows: “In the Bible, a musical stringed instrument resembling a lyre; Daniel 3:5” (p. 1593). This dictionary stated that this word “has acquired its second meaning from somewhat resembling in form Hebrew sabbeca, and being used to translate it” (Ibid.). Perhaps from the influence of that dictionary or some other possible common source, the 1976 Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary also listed a second definition as follows: “In the Bible, a stringed instrument” (II, p. 587).

 

Some of the translations on the KJV-only view’s own line of good Bibles vary in how they translate the word in the original language at Daniel 3:5. Wycliffe’s Bible has “sambuke,” Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, and Great Bibles have “shawmes,” Bishops’ Bible has “shawme,” and the Geneva and KJV have “sackbut.” Luther’s German Bible has “Geigen” [’violin‘ according to present German].

Thus, the KJV seems to have followed the rendering of the Geneva Bible.


The Oxford English Dictionary noted: “Coverdale 1535 (for what reason is not clear) renders the word by shawmes, thus taking it to denote a wind instrument; the Geneva translators, accepting this view, seem to have chosen the rendering ‘sackbut’ on account to its resemblance in sound to the Aramaic word” (XIV, p. 333). Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible suggested that the Geneva Bible translators used sackbut “from an impression that it was a form of the same word” (Vol. IV, p. 326). Laurence Vance, a KJV-only author, wrote: “The word was first used by the Geneva Bible for the obscure instrument in Nebuchadnezzar’s band due to its resemblance in sound to the underlying Aramaic word” (Archaic Words, p. 296). McClintock also suggested that the KJV “has evidently imitated the word [sambuca]” (Cyclopedia, III, p. 211).

 

Besides the KJV's use of "sackbut" and the definitions of sackbut that refer to a wind instrument, what evidence substanciates the view that the word in the original language referred to a "wind instrument"?

 

Here is some of the evidence that indicates that the word used here in the original languages referred to a stringed instrument. Wilson’s O. T. Word Studies defined the word as “a stringed instrument of music having four strings” (p. 364). The Davis Dictionary of the Bible asserted that “the name is evidently identical with the Greek sambuke, which was an instrument of music somewhat like the harp or lyre, but with only four strings” (p. 702). The Encyclopaedia Judaica suggested that the word sabbekha at Daniel 3:5 was Aramaized version of the Greek word sambyke (Vol. 12, p. 565). Theological Wordbook of the O. T. pointed out that “it is not sure whether the Greek borrowed from the Semitic or vice versa” (II, p. 1075). Either way, the Aramaic word and the Greek word would be referring to the same musical instrument. McClintock and Strong noted that “the sambuca was a triangular instrument with four or more strings played with the fingers” (Cyclopaedia, IX, p. 211). Fairbairn’s Standard Bible Encyclopaedia affirmed that it “was a stringed instrument” (Vol. IV, p. 313). Young’s Analytical Concordance defined or described sabbeka as a “harp-like instrument” (p. 829). Green’s Concise Lexicon gave this definition: “trigon, a triangular musical instrument with four strings, similar to a lyre” (p. 163). Fallows’ Bible Encyclopaedia characterized it as “a four-stringed triangular instrument like a harp” (IV, p. 1502).


Bridges and Weigle maintained that the Aramaic word sabbeka “means a ’trigon,’ a triangular lyre or harp with four strings” (KJB Word Book, p. 294). In the text in his commentary on the book of Daniel, Edward J. Young translated the word as “trigon,” and in his comments he noted that “the Greek instrument was of triangular shape with four strings” (p. 87). In his commentary on Daniel, John Walvoord identified it as a stringed instrument (p. 84). Leon Wood referred to it as “a triangular instrument of four strings, playing high notes” in his commentary on Daniel (p. 83). In their commentary, Jamieson and Fausset have this note: “a triangular stringed instrument, having short strings, the sound being on a high sharp key” (I, p. 626). Keil and Delitzsch’s commentary has this description: “a four-stringed instrument, having a sharp, clear tone” (IV, p. 123). In its first volume on Daniel, Barnes’ Notes on the O. T. concluded that “it seems to have been a species of triangular lyre or harp” (p. 209).


The Liberty Annotated Study Bible [KJV] has a marginal note “lyre” for “sackbut” (p. 1274). The Ryrie Study Bible [KJV] described it as “a triangular instrument with four strings that played high notes” (p. 1271). The Criswell Study Bible [KJV] indicated that it was “a four-stringed, musical piece with sharp, clear tone” (p. 982). The New Scofield Reference Bible has a marginal note that described it as “a stringed instrument, like a lute” (p. 900). Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible indicated that it is “another type of harp” (p. 859). The 1657 English translation of the Dutch Bible has a note that affirmed that “some render it an harp.“ The 1842 revision by Baptists has “lyre” instead of “sackbut.“ Furthermore, even the definition and note in Waite’s Defined KJB acknowledged that the word in the original languages referred to “a triangular musical instrument with four strings, similar to a lyre” (p. 1170). In his King James Bible Companion, KJV-only author David Daniels defined “sackbut” as “triangular, 4-stringed instrument, like a lyre.“ The Oxford English Dictionary maintained that the rendering sackbut “is a mistranslation of Aramaic sabbeka, which the LXX and Vulgate render (doubtless correctly) by Greek sambuke, Latin sambuca, the name of a stringed instrument” (XIV, p. 333). Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible maintained that “’sackbut’ is unsuitable, for two reasons: it is a wind instrument; and whereas the sambuca was particularly shrill, the sackbut had a deep note” (IV, p. 326). The 1895 Sunday-School Teachers’ Bible [KJV] has this note in its article on music in the Bible: “It [sabbeca] is wrongly translated ’sackbut’ instead of ’harp’” (p. 92).