Malliator non prius nummum percussit quam suppostor eum posuit.

It is a very common Latin pattern meaning not until.

Literally, non prius ... quam is something like not earlier ... than, but in normal English we usually translate the whole pattern as not until.

So the structure is:

• non prius X ... quam Y
• X did not happen until Y happened

That means the action after quam happens first, and the main action happens only after that.

Prius is an adverb, meaning earlier or sooner.

It is not describing a noun; it is modifying the verb idea. So non prius percussit means he did not strike earlier / he did not strike before that point.

In this sentence, prius works together with non and quam as part of the fixed expression non prius ... quam.

They are both in the nominative singular, because they are the subjects of their verbs.

• malliator = the subject of percussit
• suppostor = the subject of posuit

A native English speaker often looks first at word order, but in Latin the endings matter more. Here the nominative forms tell you who is doing each action.

Because it is the direct object of percussit.

The verb percutere means to strike, and the thing struck goes in the accusative. So:

• nummum percussit = he struck the coin

This is a very normal use of the accusative in Latin.

Because eum is the accusative singular masculine form of the pronoun, and here it is the direct object of posuit.

It refers back to nummum:

• nummus is masculine
• therefore the pronoun referring to it is also masculine
• as the object of posuit, it must be accusative
• so the form is eum

A very common beginner mistake is to expect a pronoun for a thing to be neuter. But in Latin, pronouns agree with the grammatical gender of the noun, not with whether the thing is physically male, female, or inanimate.

Grammatically, eum is masculine singular, so in isolation it could refer to a masculine singular noun. But in this sentence, the natural and sensible referent is nummum.

Why?

• posuit means placed/put
• the object being placed is naturally the coin
• the sequence of actions also fits that reading: the coin is placed, then it is struck

So the context makes eum = nummum the intended meaning.

Both are perfect indicative active, third person singular.

• percussit = he struck / he has struck
• posuit = he placed / he has placed

In a sentence like this, English usually uses the simple past:

• struck
• placed

The perfect here presents both actions as completed past events. Since the sentence describes what actually happened, the indicative is used.

Yes, it is the same word quam, but here it is part of the fixed construction non prius ... quam.

So although quam often means than in direct comparisons, in this pattern the whole expression functions more like a conjunction:

• non prius ... quam = not until

So it is best to understand the whole phrase together, not to translate quam by itself too mechanically.

It may feel unusual to an English speaker, but it is very normal for Latin.

Latin word order is much freer because the endings show grammatical function. In this sentence:

• Malliator comes first as the subject of the main clause
• nummum comes before percussit, which is common
• the clause introduced by quam comes afterward

So the order is perfectly natural Latin. You should rely more on:

• case endings
• verb forms
• conjunctions like quam

than on English-style fixed word order.

Yes, very possibly.

Latin often omits a pronoun when the meaning is clear from context. So a sentence without eum could still make sense.

But including eum helps by:

• making the reference back to nummum explicit
• emphasizing that it is the same object in both actions
• keeping the sequence especially clear

So the pronoun is not strange or wrong; it is just more explicit.

Because the sentence is talking about a real, completed event.

Latin sometimes uses the subjunctive after words like antequam or priusquam, especially when the action is anticipated, intended, or viewed more subjectively. But here the speaker is simply stating what happened:

• the placing happened
• then the striking happened

So the indicative is the straightforward choice.

Literally, percussit does mean struck or hit. In this context, though, it has the more specific sense used for minting: struck the coin.

So this is one of those places where the basic meaning of the verb stays the same, but the context makes the English translation more specialized.

A learner should remember both levels:

• basic Latin sense: strike
• contextual English sense here: strike a coin