PLANTS CULTIVATED FOR THEIR SEEDS. 883 



the Suncla Isles, where the hattari is certainly this 

 species. It is the kao-liang, or great millet of the Chinese. 

 It is not said to be indigenous in China, nor is it men- 

 tioned by Chinese authors who lived before the Christian 

 era.^ From these facts, and the absence of any Sanskrit 

 name, the Asiatic origin seems to me a delusion. 



The plant is now cultivated in Egypt less than the 

 common sorghum, and in Ai^abia under the name dokhna 

 or dokhn.^ No botanist has seen it wild in these 

 countries. There is no proof that the ancient Egyptians 

 cultivated it, Herodotus ^ spoke of a " tree-millet " in 

 the plains of Assyria. It might be the species in question, 

 but it is not possible to prove it. 



The Greeks and Romans were not acquainted with it, 

 not at least before the Roman empire, but it is possible 

 that this was the millet, seven feet high, which Pliny 

 mentions ^ as having been introduced from India in his 

 lifetime. 



We must probably seek its origin in tropical Africa, 

 where the species is generally cultivated. Sir William 

 Hooker ^ mentions specimens from the banks of the river 

 Nun, which were perhaps wild. The approaching pub- 

 lication of the Graminse in the flora of tropical Africa 

 will probably throw some light on this question. The 

 spread of its cultivation from the interior of Africa to 

 Egypt after the Pharaohs, to Arabia, the Indian Archi- 

 pelago, and, after the epoch of Sanskrit, to India, lastly 

 to China, towards the beginning of our era, tallies with 

 historical data, and is not difficult to admit. The inverse 

 hypothesis of a transmission from east to west presents 

 a number of objections. 



Several varieties of sorghum are cultivated in Asia 

 and in Africa; for instance, cernuus with drooping 



^ Roxburgh, Fl. Ind., edit. 2, vol. i. p. 271; Rumphius, Ainhoin., v. p. 

 194, pi. 75, fig. 1; jMiquel, Fl. Indo-Batava, iii. p. 503; Bretschneider, 

 Study and Value, etc., pp. 9, 46 ; Loureiro, Fl. Cochin., ii. p. 792. 



2 Forskal, Delile, Schweinfurth, and Ascherson, uhi supra. 



^ Herodotus, lib. i. cap. 193. 



^ Pliny, Bist., lib. xviii. cap. 7. This may also be the variety or 

 species known as hicolor. 



^ W. Hooker, Niger Flora. 



