Tobacco Irrelevant: A slightly greener world

My premise is that what if, instead of Tobacco becoming the massively exported commodity it had become in Europe during the beginnings of the modern era, Cannabis did. We know that Cannabis had been smoked during antiquity, the Historian Herodotus claims "The Scythians, as I said, take some of this hemp-seed [presumably, flowers], and, creeping under the felt coverings, throw it upon the red-hot stones; immediately it smokes, and gives out such a vapour as no Grecian vapour-bath can exceed; the Scyths, delighted, shout for joy." we also know that the Greeks and Romans enjoyed its use in their conquered middle eastern provinces. During the early modern era we also know that hemp spread in North America as a construction material. So in this scenario, let's just say Tobacco never achieves the massive following that it did in our timeline, and instead Marijuana, Hashish and other Cannabis based drugs take it's place. People like that it's better and cheaper than drinking without the ill effects of alcoholism.

How different do you think the world would be in this scenario? This one is somewhat more of a sillier timeline, but I think it's an interesting thought exercise. It's definitely possible, it's not ASB.
 
The notion of historical progression would become circular:

Stone Age -> Copper Age -> Bronze Age -> Iron Age -> Stoned Age
 
Tobacco and cannabis are not substitutes for each other. Maybe nowadays, but in the age when Europeans first discovered tobacco, they would not be, and they certainly wouldn't be for American Indians. Cannabis is not necessarily cheaper than drinking, considering it's easy to ferment your own beverages and said beverages were mass produced (and later distillation made it cheap too). Since alcoholic drinks played an important role in the nutrition and indeed, hydration, of many people, you wouldn't find cannabis as an automatic substitute. Compared to tobacco, it might be difficult to convince a military to hand it out as a ration.

Perhaps we'd find more odd choices made by historical leaders who smoked a bit too much pot? Look at instances of drunkenness in history like Winston's Hiccup amongst others. Not to mention the creativity that may result, although not saying people would be listening to psychedelic rock/psytrance in the 1500s or something. Although thinking of that, European classical music might evolve along very different lines TTL, even if not every composer is smoking pot. Maybe it's just cultural influences (thanks hippies/60s) to why I think this, and I'm definitely not saying people in that part of the world were all in "altered states" when they made/composed their music, but to me Indian classical music (at least North Indian/Hindustani) and Indonesian gamelan seem a bit more "psychedelic friendly" than other classical music. Maybe add Persian and other Middle Eastern classical music to this. Not saying we'd see some ATL Mozart making compositions calling for a gamelan orchestra, a few sitarists, etc., but we'd certainly see a very interesting evolution of Western music TTL.

But as we saw with tobacco, it's very possible for monopolies to emerge thanks to a force similar to OTL's 19th century industrialism and capitalism and a "Big Cannabis" industry to emerge. TTL they may or may not be fused to some degree with Big Tobacco, thanks to the fact the cigarette rolling machine will just as easily roll you a marijuana cigarette as it will a tobacco cigarette, and the cigarette rolling machine was key in allowing the modern tobacco industry to form.
 
Top