on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part HI. 151 



the Peralu, giving it the generic name Vodou, no doubt derived 

 from the Sanscrita Vata ; but in this they have been guided by 

 the form of the leaves. 



'J'he younger J3urman (/7. I)ul. 2'21 .) took up this phmt by the 

 name Tsjakcla, joining to it the Ficus Surattcnsis ct JSIalaburica, 

 Mori folio of Garcia: but after this tlie phmt seems to have 

 been unnoticed until j\Ir. Aiton published the first edition of 

 the Hortus Keicensis, when he called it licus vcnoso. Willdenow 

 afterwards, in the Berlin Transactions, published an account of a 

 tree which he took to be that of the Hortus Kczcensis ; but when 

 he published the Species Vhmtarum (iv. 113(j.), he discovered 

 that he had been mistaken. In place, however, of leaving the 

 name vcîiosa with the plant, which had been originally so called 

 by Alton, he transferred it to his new plant, and the Tsjakela he 

 called Ficus infectoria, a word probably of his own coining, but 

 meant perhaps to imply its being a dye. This name, however, 

 has been adopted in the second edition of the Hortus Kcwensis 

 (v. 48,5.), and by Dr. Roxburgh {Ilort. Beng. 66.) ; but rejected 

 by M. Poirct {Enc. Meth. Sup. ii. 657.), who calls the Ficus 

 venosa of M illdenow the F. Icucantatoma, — rather a hard name. 

 Specimens of the Tsjakela, under the name given bj'^ Willdenow, 

 have been presented to the library at the India House ; but I 

 must observe that the specific character of the Ficus infectoria, 

 given by Willdenow and copied by Aiton, is not applicable to 

 the plant which I mean ; and that I judge it only to be the same, 

 from the Tsjakela being quoted as synonymous. I shall there- 

 fore describe it. 



Ficus venosa. Fnc. BTeth. Sup. ii. 657. 



Ficus infectoria. Hort. Beng. 66. Hort. Kew. v. 485. JVilld, 

 Sp. PL iv. 1137, quod ad synonymon, sed non quod ad 

 characterem. 



Ficus 



