extent and nature of taxonomic disagreements. His major point 
claims that the whole controversy is based on semantics, as 
indicated in the title: “The Forensic Taxonomic Dispute on 
Cannabis: Semantic Hokum”. In a recent two-volume book, 
Small emphasizes again his belief that the biological question of 
whether the genus is monotypic or polytypic is merely one of 
semantics (Small 1979). 
But, in a technical article in 1976, Small (Small 1976) 
meticulously summarizes his research in cytology and breeding 
behaviour, chemical variation, akene morphology and taxon- 
omy, reaching the conclusion that Cannabis consists of one very 
variable species. This variation, he believes, is due primarily to 
human activity. He discerns two widespread classes: a northern 
group of “relatively limited intoxicant potential” and a more 
southern group of stronger intoxicant potential. These two 
groups are separated as distinct subspecies of C. sativa. Within 
each subspecies “two parallel phases”—the “weedy naturalized 
or indigenous” and the “cultivated or spontaneous” —are recog- 
nized as four named varieties. 
Small has, in effect, accepted the proposition that the genus 
has several genetically stable entities, but he prefers to call them 
“subspecies” instead of “species” (Small 1979)— obviously repre- 
senting a difference of weight in characters of classification 
(frequent in taxonomy) and approaching the category of “se- 
mantics”, which he previously so strongly decried (Emboden 
1981). 
The whole legal problem could easily be solved if the law 
controlling “marihuana” were more logically worded to control 
“all species of Cannabis”. Given the different viewpoints among 
botanists as to what constitutes a species, subspecies or variety, 
it may be long before agreement is reached in the taxonomic 
field, although almost all botanists who have recently considered 
the problem have concluded that the genus is indeed polytypic. 
b. MONOTERPENOID CHROMENES OF CANNABIS. Since chemical 
studies on Cannabis have rarely, if ever, been published on the 
basis of vouchered specimens, these studies cannot be docu- 
mented in a manner to permit unambiguous identification. We 
are obliged, therefore, to present a review of the chemical 
130 
