Drieoen is almost certainly an archaic Dutch spelling for 'druif' (grape), not a daffodil or obscure fruit. In 18th-century Dutch, 'drieoen' appears as a variant of 'druif' (grape), fitting the context of a list of tropical and subtropical fruits like lemons, limes, guavas, and coconuts. The footnote describing it as a fruit confirms this, while 'daffodil' is a flower and would be out of place.
The confusion arises because 'drieoen' looks similar to 'drie' (three) and 'oen' (a now-obsolete word for 'grape' or 'berry'), but historical dictionaries like the Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal (WNT) list 'druif' with variant spellings including 'drieoen' and 'druyf'. In 1744, spelling was not standardized, so writers often used phonetic or regional forms. The German translation you saw likely carried over the same archaic term, adding no clarity.
To verify this yourself: search the WNT online (available through the Instituut voor de Nederlandse Taal) for 'druif' and look for historical spellings. You can also check digitized 18th-century texts on Google Books or the Delpher database (free, from the Dutch Royal Library) by searching for 'drieoen' in context. Compare with lists of fruits from that period; grapes were commonly imported dried or fresh, while daffodils are never listed alongside edible fruits.
If you need a modern translation, simply use 'druif' (grape). For further research, consult a historical Dutch dictionary or reach out to a specialist in historical botany or linguistics. Avoid relying on modern translators unfamiliar with 18th-century Dutch spelling variations.