on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part IF. 233 



Prions insuper foliola breviora, profundiiis incisa ; seci plus minus specietii 

 non distinguit. 



Kari Bepou, seu Bepu, p. 109. tab. 53. 



By the vulgar of Malabar this is reckoned to belong to the same genus with 

 the preceding ; but the Brahmans, whether they call it Karabou or Carl Beii, 

 think it different ; for the Melia they call Nimhoii, evidently derived from 

 Nimba of the Sanscrita; so that the terminal Bou or Beo cannot be reckoned 

 a generic name, as Rheede would seem to have thought. 



Commeline appears to have entertained no doubt that this should be placed 

 in the same genus Nimbo with the Aria Bepou ; and from Phikenet (^Alm. 269.) 

 I learn that both he and Breynius were of the same opinion, the latter calling 

 it an Azadirachta, while Plukenet called it Olea Malabaricu \lmho dicta fructu 

 rotundiore, although it must be observed that its fruit has not even the slight 

 resemblance to an Olive which the fruit of the Aria Bepou possesses, but is 

 evidently a berry ; and the filamenta being distinct, it cannot even belong to 

 the order of Melice. 



I find no notice of this plant in subsequent authors ; but were it not that 

 Rheede describes it as a lofty tree, I should have little hesitation in considering 

 it as the Bergera Knenigii, which in the Tamul language, a dialect of that 

 spoken in Malabar, is called Kari Fepa (Hort. Be»g. 32.), evidently the same 

 name with Kari Bepu. At any rate, there can be no doubt of botli plants 

 belonging to the same genus, which differs in no respect from the Murrayu 

 exotica, that is, the Camunium japonicum of Rumphius {Herb. Amb. v. 29. 

 t. 18.y. 2.) ; nor from the Calcha.s paniculata, that is, the Camunium javanicum 

 of Rumphius {Herb. Amb. v. 27. t. 2/.). As I consider it thus absolutely 

 necessary to unite three Linnaean genera, I would propose that the name 

 Camunium, given by Rumphius to two of the three, sliould [be restored. 

 Leaving these two to be treated of in a Commentary on the Herbarium 

 Amhoinense, I shall here confine myself to give an account of the Bergera 

 Kwnigii, and to point out in what respects the Kari Bepou differs. The 

 plant, whicli I call Bergera Kcenigii, I was assured by Dr. Roxburgh was 

 pointed out to iiim by Koenig himself, and it agrees sufficiently with the 

 character given by Willdenow ; but if this author actually meant the Papaja 



