(Cannabi similis exotica), J. Bauhin and Cherler (Bangue cannabi simile), Ray
(Bangue cannabi), Rheede (Kalengi cansjava and Tsjeru cansjava), Morison
(Cannabis peregrina gemmis fructuum longioribus), and Kaempfer (BaandMa). In
summary, Linnaeus’sC. sativataxon represents“rope, not dope”(McPartland et al.
2000 ). It does not align with vernacular “Sativa,” known for its potent
psychoactivity.
4.3 Formal Botanical Nomenclature:C. indica
Lamarck ( 1785 ) coined C. indicafor plants of Indian provenance and their
descendants in Southeast Asia and South Africa. For a full account of his proto-
logue see McPartland and Guy ( 2017 ). The description ofC. indicadiffered from
that ofC. sativa by eight“very distinct” morphological characters, in stalks,
branching habitus, leaflets, andflowers. Lamarck notedfine details inC. indica,
“femaleflowers have a vellous calyx and long styles.”In other words, the perigonal
bract (“calyx”) is velvety (“vellous”), due to a dense pubescence of CSG trichomes.
Nearly 230 years passed before others noted long styles inC. indica(Small and
Naraine2015a). Lamarck also described chemotaxonomic differences:C. indica
produced a strong odor, and caused intoxication when smoked in a pipe.
Lamarck’s type specimen at the Paris herbarium was collected by Pierre
Sonnerat, probably around Pondicherry. Lamarck’s specimen shows denser growth
and more compact branching than Linnaeus’s specimen (Fig.4.1). Its inflorescences
Fig. 4.1 Herbarium type specimens ofC. sativaL. (left), andC. indicaLam. (right), photographs
courtesy of McPartland and Guy ( 2017 )
4 Cannabis sativaandCannabis indica... 103