on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part IV. 223 
WADOUKA, p. 97. tab. 46. 
In my commentary on the Jdou Moulli I have mentioned the error into 
which Plukenet seems to have fallen concerning these plants. Commeline 
gives no opinion concerning this tree; nor, except the erroneous quotation of 
it by Plukenet, do I find it noticed by any subsequent author. Its fruit, as 
Rheede observes, has a considerable resemblance to that of the Nyalel (t. 16.); 
but the two trees in other respects have no affinity, and the Nyalel is as un- 
known as the Wadouka. -The description and figure of the Wadouka seem to 
refer entirely to a female plant, which, from its habit, and from the structure 
of its fruit, especially of its seed, would appear to have an affinity to the order 
of Capparides, although there is no appearance of the germen being supported 
on a pedicel. 
Rava Pou, seu Pu, p. 99. tab. 47, 48. 
Pu signifying a flower, Rava is the proper name of the plant. Neither 
this nor the Marotina given by the Brahmans has any connexion with the 
term £ristis given by the Portuguese, and adopted by Commeline, who on this 
account classes it most improperly with the Mania Pu Maram (Hort. Malab. 
i. 35. tab. 21.), and places them both in the genus Jasminum, to which the 
Rava Pou has not the smallest resemblance. 
Linnzeus having founded a genus called Nyctanthes, placed in it not only 
both the Mania and Rava, but also some plants which have nearly the fruc- 
tification of the Jasminum (Burm. Fl. Ind. 4.), and thus the Rava Pou was 
called Nyctanthes hirsuta. 
M. Sonnerat, having figured a plant under the name of Cadambu, Jussieu 
considered it as the same with the Rava Pou and as a species of Guettarda 
(Gen. Pl. 230.). M. Lamarck adopted the same opinions, and considered the 
Cadamba and Rava Pou as identically the same with the Guettarda speciosa of 
Linnaeus (Enc. Méth. iii. 53.). Willdenow, however, was of a contrary opi- 
nion, and insisted not only that the Rava Pou was different from the Cadamba, 
but that it is a Jasminum, which he calls hirsutum (Sp. Pl. i. 36.), as being the 
Nyctanthes hirsuta of Linnzus; for these two genera he admits to be the 
same. He supports his opinion by referring to a figure by some person named 
Browne; but I see no such figure quoted among the synonyma even in his 
