The Cannabis Grow Bible. Greg Green

in The Origin of Species (1859). Darwin verified through the mechanism of natural selection that all organisms had gradually evolved from a common ancestor. This effect is much like a tree with branches and every branch being the line from which new organisms are evolving. Because of extinction large segments of this tree vanish from the face of the Earth while other segments remain. Even though a gradual evolution of an organism has taken place, these gradual changes are not always seen living among us (for example, the dinosaurs are extinct); however, had all of the history of biological things been present, we would have great trouble with the term “species” because the diversity would seem much less. In fact, it might be no more than the difference of a pimple between creatures. It certainly does expand the mind to envision such a spectacular zoo. However, Darwin’s point was clear. The concept of species is a human labelling system that gets in the way of seeing biological evolution as a gradual process of biological diversity. If we don’t forget this then we can make some headway.

       Linnaeus

      1753. The genus (genera) for cannabis is contested. The father of modern taxonomy, Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus (May 23, 1707–January 10, 1778) also known as the nobleman Carl von Linné, invented a scheme of nomenclature classification and published it in his Systema Naturae. After observing what he called “Cannabis (hemp),” he subsumed all the cannabis varieties he studied under the name Cannabis sativa. The genus is called “Cannabis sativa L.”—in the order of Linnaeus.²⁰

      Since we know that all varieties (strains) of cannabis can interbreed and produce fertile offspring, this means that the species Cannabis sativa L. satisfies an important criterion for a single species orientation.²¹

       Lamarck

      1785. The French biologist Jean Lamarck immediately challenged this single species orientation by classifying a distinctive second species of cannabis, “C. indica.” Lamarck was very precise about the differences:

      This plant, of which Mr. Sonnerat has sent us some samples which he collected in India, appears to us a species very distinct from the preceding. It is smaller, more branched, with a firmer, nearly cylindrical stem, and it particularly is distinguished in that the leaves are all constantly alternate. The leaflets are very narrow, linear-lanceolate, and very acuminate. Male individuals have five or seven leaflets; but those which are female commonly carry only three on each petiole and the upper leaves themselves are quite simple. The calyces of the female flowers are velvety, the long styles are similarly velvety. This plant grows in the East Indies. Its firm stem and thin bark make it incapable of furnishing similar fibres to the preceding species (C. sativa L.) of which so much use is made.²²

       Delile

      1849. A. R Delile names a species found in China as C. chinensis Delile. Ind. Sem. Hort. Monst. And in 1851, he names another C. gigantea Delile. L.²³

       Janischevsky

      1924. D. E Janischevsky writes the paper “Forma konopli na sornykh mestakh v yugo-vostochnoi rossii.” Affiliated with the University of Saratov, in the former Soviet Union, he proposed the species C. ruderalis Janisch, or C. sativa L. f. ruderalis (Janisch.), or C. sativa L subsp. spontanea Serebr.

       Vavilov

      1929. Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov and D. D. Bukinich write the paper “Zemledelcheskii Afghanistan. Trudy po prikladnoi botanike, genetike i selektsii. Prilozhenie” to approve of the use of C. indica while naming a wild variety of cannabis they studied, C. indica var. kafiristanica.

       VARIETIES

      Kush

      Chronic

      Bubblegum

      Durban Poison

      Swazi

      Skunk

       Schultes

      1974. The botanists Richard E. Schultes and Loran Anderson conducted taxonomic studies of cannabis, concluding that the multiple species model of three species, Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica Lam., and Cannabis ruderalis, should be used appropriately. These proposed species are simply described: “C. sativa is tall and laxly branched with relatively narrow leaflets, Cannabis indica is shorter, conical in shape, and has relatively wide leaflets, and Cannabis ruderalis is short, branchless, and grows wild in central Asia.”²⁴

       Small

      1976. Small and Cronquist revise 223 years of taxonomy to conclude that speciation—the creation of a new species by the division of an old one—has not occurred in cannabis. They forward the original proposal by Carolus Linnaeus for a single species model, Cannabis sativa L., with two subspecies, C. sativa L. subsp. sativa and C. sativa L. subsp indica (Lam) and C. sativa L. subsp. indica var. kafiristanica (Vavilov).

       Hillig

      2005. K.W. Hillig discovers genetic evidence for speciation in Cannabaceae.

      Sample populations of 157 Cannabis accessions of diverse geographic origin were surveyed for allozyme variation at 17 gene loci. The frequencies of 52 alleles were subjected to principal components analysis. A scatter plot revealed two major groups of accessions. The sativa gene pool includes fiber/seed landraces from Europe, Asia Minor, and Central Asia, and ruderal populations from Eastern Europe. The indica gene pool includes fiber/seed landraces from eastern Asia, narrow-leafleted drug strains from southern Asia, Africa, and Latin America, wide-leafleted drug strains from Afghanistan and Pakistan, and feral populations from India and Nepal. A third putative gene pool includes ruderal populations from Central Asia. None of the previous taxonomic concepts that were tested adequately circumscribe the sativa and indica gene pools. A polytypic concept of Cannabis is proposed, which recognizes three species, C. sativa, C. indica and C. ruderalis, and seven putative taxa.²⁵

       ANCIENT NAMES

BC	Qunubu, Konaba^27^,^28^, qěnēh bośem^29, κανναβɩς, kannabis and hemp
AD	hemp, Indian hemp, cannabis, and marijuana^30