In 1798, Napoleon launched a campaign in Egypt and Syria to cut off British trade and liberate Egypt from Ottoman rule. After the conquest, he sought to build local support by embracing Islamic culture and promoting scientific exchange. His army had about 40,000 members, including scholars and scientists who were responsible for the establishment of libraries, laboratories, and research centers that contributed significantly to the development of various disciplines.
The discovery of hashish, although not perceived as a revolutionary event at the time, had a significant impact on European culture and literature. Prior to the campaign in Egypt, hashish was little known in Europe and virtually unused. However, French soldiers stationed in Egypt quickly became familiar with the substance. Hashish was widely sold in cafes, markets, and smoking rooms.
Limited access to French wines and liqueurs, as well as a desire to embrace Egyptian culture at Napoleon's initiative, encouraged many French soldiers to use hashish.
Unfortunately, hashish continued to be associated with Sufi mystics and was viewed with contempt by the Sunni elite. Upon his return to France, command of Egypt passed to General Jacques-François Menou, a French revolutionary of noble birth who married a member of the upper Sunni class upon his appointment. For Menou, banning hashish was a way to resolve political and social conflicts: he saw it as a way to pacify the Sunni elite by cracking down on Sufi communities, as well as address public health concerns among French troops.
In 1800, a decree was issued prohibiting the cultivation, sale and consumption of cannabis throughout Egypt. It stated that «the use of strong liquor made by Muslims from hashish and the smoking of cannabis seeds are forbidden because they cause loss of reason and delirium leading to various excesses».
This prohibition may have been the first modern drug law, but it was generally unsuccessful. Hashish continued to be produced, sold and widely consumed throughout Egypt, and after the withdrawal of French troops in 1801, it returned to Europe. Hashish was subsequently widely distributed in France and other Western European countries.
Outside of Britain, in India, the cannabis situation was different. As a native plant of the Indian subcontinent, it grew wild and was probably still used by early agrarian communities. Psychoactive varieties of marijuana were prominent in Hindu, Buddhist and Tantric religions. Over time, the cannabis industry in India evolved and the harvested product was divided into three main varieties that still exist today.
The cheapest and most common is bhang, a low-quality marijuana made from crushed leaves, seeds and flowers that produces a weak high. At the other end of the spectrum is chars, the highest quality and highest priced marijuana, derived from plants grown in mountain plantations in the Hindu Kush and Himalayas at elevations between 4,000 and 7,000 feet. This variety is considered one of the most prized in the world. In between is ganga, a mid-range crop in terms of value and potency, grown from well-groomed female plants and consisting of a mixture of resin and cannabis flowers.
One of the first Europeans to describe the Indian marijuana industry was the Portuguese physician Garcia da Horta. In 1563, he wrote: «The Indians derive no benefit from it except that they are delighted, relieved of their cares, and laugh at the smallest things. It is said that it was they who first found a use for this plant».
One of the first Europeans to describe the Indian marijuana industry was the Portuguese physician Garcia da Horta. In 1563, he wrote: «The Indians derive no benefit from it except that they are delighted, relieved of their cares, and laugh at the smallest things. It is said that it was they who first found a use for this plant».
Some 200 years later, the British contemplated banning marijuana in India. The ruling class and the British Governor General pushed for a complete ban, fearing the social unrest caused by use. However, the British had their own interests: they saw the cannabis industry as a source of revenue and began taxing it in 1790, and in 1793 established licensing for growers and sellers.
Nevertheless, the temperance movement continued to gain momentum, linking marijuana use to the rise of opium addiction. From 1894-1895, the seven-volume, 3,500-page «Report of the Commission on Narcotics from Indian Hemp», the largest study of the substance in history, was produced. It heard from more than a thousand witnesses from around the world.
The results showed that the cultivation and use of cannabis is almost impossible to eradicate completely, and that seizures and bans are not justified: «A complete ban on the cultivation of cannabis for narcotic purposes, and on the production, sale and use of its preparations, is not necessary or appropriate, given its effects, prevalence, social and religious sensitivities, and the possibility of users switching to more harmful stimulants or drugs».
The Commission continued to recommend the following taxation and licensing scheme for the marijuana cultivation industry.
The means to be adopted to achieve control and restriction are as follows:
— Adequate taxation, which can best be accomplished by combining a direct tax with an auction of the privilege of sale
— Prohibition of cultivation except for licensed cultivation, and centralization of cultivation.
This may be the first time in history that a government study has recommended a centralized marijuana cultivation system. While the commission's report is comprehensive in many respects, it does not detail specific measures for centralized management; it merely suggests that the most effective way to limit supply is to «issue cultivation licenses that ensure control and registration of production».
Despite the commission's efforts, Parliament lukewarmly endorsed its findings. As a result, the marijuana trade continued without significant change, and the tax and licensing systems for cultivators remained unstable. In the informal sphere, bhang was grown almost universally, while ganga crops were mostly produced on state-licensed farms and charas were imported from the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas. This structure persisted into the global prohibition era of the twentieth century.
The idea of «centralized cultivation» was largely forgotten after the commission's report was published. However, a century later, state regulators looking for their role in the post-prohibition era of the twenty-first century have again recognized its benefits.
The history of marijuana cultivation demonstrates that prohibition is almost always imposed by the ruling class. The plant's role as a spiritual, medicinal or recreational drug, perceived by the poor, is feared by the elite because it threatens the existing political, religious or economic order they serve. Therefore, there are not many cases where marijuana has found acceptance among the ruling class and has been persecuted from below. However, the history of the Bashilange tribe shows that marijuana users can be the target of persecution from any side.
The idea of «centralized cultivation» was largely forgotten after the commission's report was published. However, a century later, state regulators looking for their role in the post-prohibition era of the twenty-first century have again recognized its benefits.
The history of marijuana cultivation demonstrates that prohibition is almost always imposed by the ruling class. The plant's role as a spiritual, medicinal or recreational drug, perceived by the poor, is feared by the elite because it threatens the existing political, religious or economic order they serve. Therefore, there are not many cases where marijuana has found acceptance among the ruling class and has been persecuted from below. However, the history of the Bashilange tribe shows that marijuana users can be the target of persecution from any side.
In the mid-nineteenth century, the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo controlled by the Bashilanje tribe was a vast wilderness. The Bashilanje were brutal warriors, eating the bodies of their victims and enslaving their captives. They created laws that required other tribes to pay them tribute or face imminent death. However, a survey of these lands by the Governor of German East Africa revealed a marked change in Bashilange culture: the tribe discovered marijuana and quickly adopted it as part of their identity.
History shows that prohibitions are almost always imposed by the ruling class. The Bashilanje tribesmen called themselves the «Sons of Cannabis» and passed laws to promote peace and friendship: they renounced cannibalism, stopped carrying weapons, stopped killing tribesmen, and started having more sex. They smoked marijuana regularly, especially during religious ceremonies, holidays, and political alliances. Previously known as brutal killers, they turned into calm marijuana-growing peacemakers.
History shows that prohibitions are almost always imposed by the ruling class. The Bashilanje tribesmen called themselves the «Sons of Cannabis» and passed laws to promote peace and friendship: they renounced cannibalism, stopped carrying weapons, stopped killing tribesmen, and started having more sex. They smoked marijuana regularly, especially during religious ceremonies, holidays, and political alliances. Previously known as brutal killers, they turned into calm marijuana-growing peacemakers.
Jack Herer may have been hyperbolizing when he said that cannabis farmers throughout history could not imagine its suppression in the twentieth century.
View attachment ej3Qr5Ndc9.jpg
Historical records show that while marijuana cultivation was supported in some regions, in other cases authorities made efforts to eradicate crops and harass farmers. Targeting the first stage of the supply chain is a logical step for prohibitionists, because marijuana's role as an instrument of religious, political, or economic change made it a threat to the established order.
Our marijuana-growing ancestors could have predicted that prohibitionists would use predictable methods: associating the plant with violence, debauchery and more dangerous drugs — as European teetotalers did in France and Britain. They will use military force to destroy crops, harass farmers and intimidate a new generation from growing marijuana — as the Ottomans did in Egypt. Consumers may be portrayed as religious extremists or dangerous minorities, as Pope Innocent VIII did in Europe, Sunni Muslims in the Middle East, or whites in South Africa. At best, the authorities may simply turn a blind eye to the inexorable demand, like the Portuguese in Brazil or the British in India.
Our marijuana-growing ancestors could talk about this as a 20th-century War on Drugs scenario. The U.S. prohibition era didn't come up with new tactics — it simply gathered all known methods of fighting back, and put more resources and effort into them than any previous prohibition movement in history.