Mystical pipe from the Sandbox

[Russell.webb]

I found this pipe in Afghanistan when I was there back in 2004. It is one of my favorite things in my collection.

[clovisoid]

Is it three pieces? (Mouth peice, body, lid?)
Cool piece.

[Russell.webb]

Yes it is three pieces.

[painshill]

Very interesting. Is anyone else seeing that as stylised interpretation of a man on the back of a whale? And is the detachable mouthpiece which might represent the man's head free from any facial features? I have reasons for asking those questions!

[chase]

I can picture that. What next your going to tell us its a whale lamp.
I would say I see a man riding the back of a whale.

[painshill]

chase wrote:

I can picture that. What next your going to tell us its a whale lamp.
I would say I see a man riding the back of a whale.

  No... not doubting a pipe and not doubting it's heritage. But let's see if anyone else sees man on whale/giant fish... and I'm still interested in knowing if the mouthpiece has or has not any facial features.

[gregszybala]

I can't figure out what I'm seeing. If a man on a whale, very stylized and would that be likely from Afghanistan? Would like to see it from different angles. If a pipe, your chin would be right above the bowl, unless there was a flexible tube maybe like a hookah? Hash or opium pipe?
Interesting!

[cgode]

I could see a whale with a man taking the ride. You obviously have something in mind Roger, I can only imagine! It's a very unique piece, would love to hear more details on how/where found.

[Russell.webb]

I have wondered these things as well, but I finally concluded that it is a plant reed with a bud as the base, and I'm pretty sure it was used for opium but I'm not for sure.

[clovisoid]

Jonah of the Whale is a more significant profit to Islam than he is in Christianity, and he's buried in northern Sunni Iraq quite far from any source of water.  Afghanistan is Sunni, and Islam doesn't like showing human facial features, hence the faceless portion.
It hadn't occurred to me, but assuming that's where Painshill was going it's a very clever and well informed hypothesis.

[painshill]

clovisoid wrote:

Jonah of the Whale is a more significant profit to Islam than he is in Christianity, and he's buried in northern Sunni Iraq quite far from any source of water.  Afghanistan is Sunni, and Islam doesn't like showing human facial features, hence the faceless portion.
It hadn't occurred to me, but assuming that's where Painshill was going it's a very clever and well informed hypothesis.

  Yes Joshua, that is indeed where I was going.
What struck me was that it’s really unusual to see anything anthropomorphic or zoomorphic in Islamic art (especially if Sunni), except in extremely stylised form. That’s why Islamic art is “aniconistic”… dominated by geometric patterns and such… artists were constrained by what was permitted. People are almost never depicted unless they are prophet figures and – even then – as Joshua says, either the face is blank or it’s obscured. Depiction of mythical beasts (such as “whale”/giant fish/sea monster) would probably be OK on the basis that such creatures might not be regarded as “sentient beings”, the depiction of which is forbidden by the Quran.
When you do see such depictions they almost invariably relate to some important religious story. The Quran does indeed repeat the Biblical story of Jonah and the “whale” (actually “giant fish” from the most contemporary text translations), with the Prophet Sura Yunus as a parallel to Jonah.
Later western maritime portrayals (“Jonah” pipes were in extremely common use by sailors in the 18th and 19th Century) tend to focus on the sea monster and the “swallowing” part of the story. But, the original point of the tale is that the beast saved Jonah from drowning and carried him to safety so that he could have a second attempt at the mission God had given him… and from which he had “chickened out”.
Russell is probably in the best position to judge whether it is actually meant to be a flower bud of some kind rather than a mythical sea-creature akin to a whale… but I would still be troubled by what appears to be a stylised person morphing into it.
As a pipe, I would say that the size of the combustion chamber suggests it’s unlikely to be for opium. The general configuration – unperforated lid on the combustion chamber and small vent hole - also look much more consistent with something designed for the slow-burning of tobacco rather than smoking hashish. I would assume that the detachable “mouthpiece” is actually the grommet end of a long tube (such as hollow reed) which led to the mouth. It might just possibly have had flexible tubes leading to the mouth via a water-cooling chamber in the manner of traditional Afghan chillim pipes. Water-cooling of smoke probably originates from a Persian physician at the court of the Mughal Emperor in what is now India in the late 1500’s. Not long after that, the technique spread throughout the Middle East using flexible “hoses” made of birch bark.

[Russell.webb]

Wow, great information. Thanks for the help guys. Does anyone have an idea as to how old it is?

[painshill]

Russell.webb wrote:

Wow, great information. Thanks for the help guys. Does anyone have an idea as to how old it is?

  That’s a toughie. Tobacco pipes have a long history in the Middle East. If one accepts the “Sura Yunus” iconography then it couldn’t be pre-Islamic (ie not before the 630’s AD on our Western calendar) and it’s also very elaborate for an early pipe. If it ever had a water-cooling attachment then it couldn’t be earlier than about 1600AD. My guess (and it is only a guess) would be 17th – 18th Century, but perhaps earlier if it only had a rigid stem mouthpiece without any water cooling.