Aequator monetae non prius dupondium accipit quam pondus spectat.

Aequator is an agent noun: someone who adjusts, balances, or checks something. In a money context, it can mean something like an assayer, inspector, or adjuster of coinage.

monetae is genitive singular, so it means of the mint / of coinage / of money, depending on context.

So aequator monetae is a phrase like the inspector of the mint or the assayer of coinage.

Dupondium is in the accusative singular, because it is the direct object of accipit.

In other words, it is the thing the inspector accepts.

A learner does not need to know every historical detail of the word to see the grammar here: the structure is simply:

• aequator = subject
• dupondium = direct object
• accipit = verb

This is a very common Latin pattern:

non prius ... quam = not ... until

More literally, it means not sooner/earlier ... than.

So the sentence is built like this:

• non prius accipit
• quam pondus spectat

That is, he does not accept it before he examines the weight.

That is a very natural question. By itself, quam often does mean than, especially in comparisons.

But in the fixed expression non prius ... quam, English usually translates the whole phrase as not ... until.

So Latin keeps the comparative idea:

• not earlier than when he examines the weight

but English normally says:

• not until he examines the weight

So quam has not changed meaning randomly; it is part of an idiom.

Both accipit and spectat are present indicative.

Latin often uses the present tense for a general rule, habitual action, or regular procedure, not only for something happening right this second.

So the sense is something like:

• The inspector does not accept the coin until he checks the weight
• that is, this is what he normally does

Here pondus is the direct object of spectat, so it is accusative singular.

The tricky part is that pondus is a neuter third-declension noun, and in neuter nouns the nominative and accusative often have the same form.

So pondus could look like either nominative or accusative by form alone. You tell from the sentence structure:

• spectat needs an object
• the subject is already aequator
• therefore pondus is the object: he examines the weight

Because Latin often leaves out a repeated subject when it is already clear.

The subject of accipit is aequator, and the subject of spectat is understood to be the same person.

So Latin does not need to say:

• Aequator monetae ... accipit ... quam aequator pondus spectat

That would be unnecessary repetition.

Yes, the basic meaning of spectat is looks at, observes, or watches.

But like many verbs of seeing, it can also mean inspect, examine, or consider carefully.

So with pondus, the idea is not just casually seeing the weight, but checking or inspecting it.

That is a normal extension of the verb’s meaning.

It is not unusual for Latin. Latin word order is much freer than English word order.

English depends heavily on position:

• subject + verb + object

Latin depends much more on endings.

So in this sentence, you identify the roles by grammar, not just by position:

• aequator = subject
• dupondium = object of accipit
• pondus = object of spectat

The order also helps the sentence flow naturally around the pattern non prius ... quam.

A very literal breakdown would be:

• Aequator monetae = the mint inspector / coinage inspector
• non prius = not earlier / not sooner
• dupondium accipit = accepts the dupondium
• quam = than / before the time when
• pondus spectat = he inspects the weight

So, word-for-word-ish, the sense is:

The mint inspector does not accept the dupondium sooner than when he inspects the weight.

That sounds awkward in English, which is why the natural English version uses until.