Besides these names of the Latins, I will mention a few others, and first that of _Aborigines_. It is inconceivable that this name should ever have been borne by the Latin nation itself, for it is nothing else but the designation of a primitive people. The ancients generally explain it to mean a nation from which others are descended; but this etymology can scarcely be correct, it is probably synonymous with the Greek αὐτόχθονες, for under this name and in this sense they are actually mentioned in Roman traditions. We must bear in mind that all traditions agree in representing the Latins as a mixed race: in the Trojan legends they consist of Trojans and Aborigines, that is, strangers who arrived by sea, and natives. But these legends do not belong to the history of nations; they are mere fictions, which arose out of the Tyrrhenian origin of the Latins. According to the other legend, which has more of the character of an historical tradition, the Latin nation arose out of an immigrating people, which, descending from the mountains, subdued the _Siculi_ (only a dialectic variety of _Itali_), the ancient inhabitants who extended into the interior as far as Tibur. This immigrating people had no name, or we must suppose that its name or names have disappeared from the traditions. But they were called _Casci_ (which, according to Saufeius in Servius, was the name of the Aborigines) or _Prisci_. In a later and more detailed account of the history, this relation is completely reversed, the immigrating mountaineers being called Aborigines. This is evidently wrong, for those are not autochthons who subdue others, but those who are subdued: thus the natives of Attica are called autochthons by the conquering Ionians. The name _Prisci_ is an original national name, though it is not mentioned by the ancients: _Priscus_, like _Cascus_, became a common appellative in the sense of “old” in the same way as we call a thing Gothic or Old-Frankish; but this is only a later meaning. The name by which the Latins are mentioned in the early history of Rome and in the formulae of the pontifical books, is _Prisci Latini_. This has been translated “the ancient Latins” as opposed to the _colonarii Latini_; but this is quite impossible, for they bore that name at a time when no Latin colonies were in existence. _Prisci Latini_ is a combination of two national names just like _populus Romanus Quirites_, _Patres Conscripti_, and the legal expressions _empti venditi_, _locati conducti_, and signifies “the nation of the Prisci and Latini.” Two words denoting either closely allied, or totally opposed objects, the two extremes or poles of one idea, are put in juxtaposition without any connecting link; this was the practice wherever one whole was to be expressed by two terms. In this respect also much is still to be done for Latin grammar; some things have been treated of with great diffuseness, which might be settled in a few words, while others have been completely neglected.