The progress of the word from west to east, and then from east to
south-west, and from thence northwards, and its various changes in that
progress, are rather strange.

One would have supposed that the Arabs, living near the region of which the
fruit was a native, might have either had a name of their own for it, or at
least have borrowed one from Armenia. But they apparently adopted a slight
variation of the Latin, [Greek: to palaion onoma], as Galen says, [Greek:
exeleleiptô].

The Arabs called it [Arabic: brqwq] or, with the article, [Arabic:
albrqwq].

The Spaniards must have had the fruit in Martial's time, but they do not
take the name immediately from the Latin, but through the Arabic, and call
it _albaricoque_. The Italians, again, copy the Spanish, not the Latin, and
call it _albicocco_. The French, from them, have _abricot_. The English,
though they take their word from the French, at first called it _abricock_,
then _apricock_ (restoring the _p_), and lastly, with the French
termination, _apricot_.

From _malum persicum_ was derived the German _Pfirsiche_, and _Pfirsche_,
whence come the French _pêche_, and our _peach_. But in this instance also,
the Spaniards follow the Arabic [Arabic: bryshan], or, with the article
[Arabic: albryshan], in their word _alberchigo_. The Arabic seems to be
derived from the Latin, and the Persians, though the fruit was their own,
give it the same name.

Johnson says that nectarine is French, but gives no authority. It certainly
is unknown to the French, who call the fruit either _pêche lisse_, or