The Culture of Khat by Ezekiel Gebissa / go back to Issue 5 
      In the late 1980s, I came  across a Ph.D. dissertation that purported to explain why graduate students  from Eastern Africa choose American universities in the Midwest for graduate  education. I was puzzled by the vacuity of the research question. I was from East  Africa but I didn’t choose to come to Michigan State University; I only grabbed  an opportunity I knew wasn’t available to the millions of my friends and cohort.  When I completed my graduate studies, a friend read my dissertation on the  political economy of khat and told me that he didn’t think that it was a  history dissertation. He was partially right in the sense that the early 1990s  saw the historicizing of anthropology and the anthropologizing of history. One  needed the other to survive the birth pangs and growing pains of post-modernism  in academia. I had to be trained as an anthropologist to be able to conduct the kind of research that was in vogue at the time.
       Yet it was not my training as  an anthropologist that eventually led to the kind of history dissertation I wrote.  Just like I did not choose which graduate  school to attend, I did not a have the privilege of choosing the topic of khat for  my dissertation research. I was forced into it. The main dissertation-funding agencies  for doctoral research (the Social Science Research Council, the Ford  Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation) showed preference for human development  issues in such areas as health, education, agriculture and so forth. I was  faced with a dilemma of writing a dissertation based on secondary sources or on  original fieldwork data. One day, I stopped by the office of the late Professor  Harold Marcus, my research director and advisor, to discuss my predicament. Our  conversation quickly turned to the value of original research for my career. I  told him that I had decided, despite the uncertainty of funding, that I would  study the work of indigenous Protestant missionaries among the Oromo.  He looked at me with his fingers crossed and  said, very casually: “How about chat (khat)?” I wasn’t sure he was serious.  “Chat,” I said. “Yes, why not write on the social history of chat?” It took a  while to sink in, but that was it. I began studying khat. Since then I have  learned a lot about the political economy but largely ignored the cultural  ecology of khat.  The  following paragraphs give a taste of that aspect of khat. The culture of chewing  is expanding, in spite protestations that it is harmful, but what does it really  mean to chew khat?
Yet it was not my training as  an anthropologist that eventually led to the kind of history dissertation I wrote.  Just like I did not choose which graduate  school to attend, I did not a have the privilege of choosing the topic of khat for  my dissertation research. I was forced into it. The main dissertation-funding agencies  for doctoral research (the Social Science Research Council, the Ford  Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation) showed preference for human development  issues in such areas as health, education, agriculture and so forth. I was  faced with a dilemma of writing a dissertation based on secondary sources or on  original fieldwork data. One day, I stopped by the office of the late Professor  Harold Marcus, my research director and advisor, to discuss my predicament. Our  conversation quickly turned to the value of original research for my career. I  told him that I had decided, despite the uncertainty of funding, that I would  study the work of indigenous Protestant missionaries among the Oromo.  He looked at me with his fingers crossed and  said, very casually: “How about chat (khat)?” I wasn’t sure he was serious.  “Chat,” I said. “Yes, why not write on the social history of chat?” It took a  while to sink in, but that was it. I began studying khat. Since then I have  learned a lot about the political economy but largely ignored the cultural  ecology of khat.  The  following paragraphs give a taste of that aspect of khat. The culture of chewing  is expanding, in spite protestations that it is harmful, but what does it really  mean to chew khat?
      Psychoactive plants—cannabis,  opium, coca, tea, coffee, and tobacco—have been in constant use throughout  history by nearly all societies in the world for medicinal, religious, and  social purposes.  In the Horn of Africa, khat has traditionally been  used for treating headaches, diarrhea, depression, muscle aches, arthritic  conditions, tooth aches and sore throats. Other modes of using khat, making  drinks and chewing the leaves, possibly started with its use as a medicine. 
      Among the Oromo, the Afran  Qalloo of Harerge are perhaps the first to use khat. They have chewed it certainly  for at least 150 years but possibly for more. In my interviews in the vicinity  of Harer, some Oromo chewers tell me that they use the khat-induced high for work while others do so for  pleasure.  There’s nothing new about  both.  For centuries,  religious leaders have consumed the leaves to stay awake during long nights of  prayer, merchants during long-distance travels, and farmers for energy.  Urbanites have always used khat for recreation, concentration of the mind, and conversation  of all kinds. What is common to both categories of chewers, at least in  Harerge, is the profound cultural importance of khat and its role as a medium  of social interaction. 
      As a social institution, khat  chewing is valued for its critical role in maintaining cultural cohesion, and in  facilitating such activities as work, meditative worship and cultural  ceremonies. The Oromo of Harerge customarily offered visitors khat as a sign of  hospitality, served the leaves on important occasions such as birth, marriage,  funeral, and naming ceremonies, and chewed large amounts during popular rituals  performed to ward off natural calamities.  In all of these cases, khat chewing serves as  an essential social lubricant that fosters amity, cooperation, and sociality. 
      The presence of khat in  worship practices demonstrates the leaf’s significance in the religious life  and practices of the Muslim Oromo of Harerge. Khat is highly regarded by  Muslims as a plant blessed by God and given to humans. It is thus referred to as "the  leaf of Allah" or “food of the saints.” At religious ceremonies  held at Muslim shrines, participants spend long hours of the day and night  chewing khat while reciting passages from Holy Qur’an and praying to Allah.  Chewing enjoyed an important role during Ramadan, at the Arafa celebrations, which are particularly popular in Harerge, during the Mawlid,  the birth day of the Prophet.  
      Notwithstanding the critics’  claim that khat chewing is a waste of time that could be employed for  productive purposes, it seems that the chew sessions are integrated well into  the work day.  For farmers, for instance,  the day commences with the morning chew or the igabana, literally the eye-opener, followed by hours of feverish  work in the oyiru, garden.  In the early afternoon, the farmers gather  for another session, the barcha, in  which small groups sit under a shade to rest and reflect for an hour or two.  At the end of the barcha, the chewers  put their heightened energy to a productive activity, working the farms until  dusk, at which time the chewers eat dinner. The last chew session is known as  the atarora, which takes place before  bedtime.
      There have been historically some peculiarities surrounding khat.  Among Christians, chewing khat is despised as a habit inspired by the devil. At  best, chewing khat is regarded as a Muslim habit that good Christians have been  keen to avoid. While this attitude has never been universal, the prevalent belief  has been that only wayward young Christians dabbled in chewing the leaves. In  the Harer region, at least, residents  have always chewed for entertainment, conviviality, and socializing with  friends and relatives. The barcha session is a popular event because it provides a calm environment for peaceful  discourse and decisions on serious business or political matters. I have  learned from historical sources that the business and political elite of the  Emirate of Harer used khat before making serious decisions. Anecdotes that this  tradition has persisted to this day abound, some actually suggesting that it  has spread to the national level, but I don’t have solid evidence that buttresses  the claims.   
      What is incontrovertible is  that the barcha has become a  commonplace sight in urban areas, where users congregate in a designated room  in private houses and lie on their sides against a pile of cushions to  meditate, read and engage in the talk of the town.  Chewers drink water or tea to reduce dryness of  the mouth and to assist the extraction of the juice.  Some chewers take a pinch of sugar or a sip  of Coca Cola to moderate the bitter taste and smoke cigarettes as they  chew.  At the end of the session, some  drink alcoholic beverages to counteract the inebriating effects of khat and  allow for sound sleep.  Since most urban  chewers are office workers or private businessmen, their explanation does make  sense, even though the practice of mixing khat with alcohol is considered an  anathema to many chewers who view khat as a sacred gift that should not be  mixed with the profane act of alcohol consumption. 
      This change has been long in  coming, beginning with the oppressive political atmosphere of the 1970s and  1980s, but the lack of employment and of other recreational recourses are  probably the reasons for the expansion of chewing for pleasure throughout the  country. In the last decade, khat chewing houses, similar to a restaurant or a  tea house, have became thriving businesses, catering to different classes of  people. Private homes in upscale neighborhoods and other precincts in major  cities now provide khat chewing rooms fully furnished with pillows, a variety  of khat brands, and other accessories needed for a chew session. 
      Chewing khat has always been controversial. Motivated by  religious conviction, cultural distance, or medical concern, many people  consider khat as a harmful substance that must be banned. The opposition  notwithstanding, the culture of chewing has become a national  pastime in Ethiopia. Interestingly, it has also become a practice that provides  a tangible link to the homeland for many in Diaspora. 
      _______________________
      Dr. Ezekiel Gebissa is currently a professor of history at Kettering University. After graduating  from Addis Ababa University, he came to the United States where he earned  his Ph.D. at Michigan State University in 1997. He published his book Leaf of Allah:  Khat and Agricultural Transformation in Harerge, Ethiopia, 1875—1991 in 2004 and edited a collection of essays called Taking the Place of Food: Khat in Ethiopia in  2010. He is also the editor-in-chief of the Journal  of Oromo Studies.