Restat ut emptores inter se licitentur.

Restat is the 3rd person singular present indicative of resto, restare, meaning remains or is left.

In this sentence, it is used in the common expression restat ut ..., which means something like:

• it remains that ...
• all that remains is for ...
• the only thing left is that ...

So restat is not just a simple remains in a physical sense; it often introduces the next or final thing to be done.

After restat, Latin often uses ut + subjunctive to express what remains to be done.

So:

• restat = it remains
• ut emptores inter se licitentur = that the buyers bid against one another

This is a standard Latin construction. In English, we usually do not translate it very literally. Instead of it remains that..., we often say:

• it remains for the buyers to bid against one another
• all that remains is for the buyers to bid against one another

So here ut introduces a content clause or complement clause, not a purpose clause.

No. Although ut very often means so that in purpose clauses, that is not what it means here.

In this sentence, ut is introducing the clause that completes the meaning of restat:

• Restat ut ... = It remains that ... / It remains for ... to ...

So this is not:

• It remains so that the buyers may bid...

Instead, it is:

• It remains for the buyers to bid...

That is an important distinction.

Licitentur is subjunctive because it is part of the construction restat ut + subjunctive.

So the subjunctive here is required by the grammar of the clause after restat. It does not necessarily mean doubt, unreality, or uncertainty. Latin uses the subjunctive in many kinds of subordinate clauses, and this is one of them.

In other words:

• restat ut normally takes the subjunctive
• therefore licitentur is subjunctive

Because the clause after restat ut requires the subjunctive, not the indicative.

Compare:

• licitantur = they are bidding / they bid (indicative)
• licitentur = they may bid / should bid / bid in a subjunctive clause

More specifically, licitentur is present subjunctive, 3rd person plural.

So the form changes because of the grammar of the whole sentence, not because the basic meaning of the verb changes.

It comes from licitor, licitari, licitatus sum, a deponent verb meaning:

• to bid
• to make an offer
• to bid against others, depending on context

A deponent verb looks passive in form but has an active meaning.

So although licitentur looks like a passive form, it actually means:

• they bid
• they compete in bidding

not they are bid.

A deponent verb uses passive forms but has an active meaning.

For licitor:

• present indicative: licitor = I bid
• present subjunctive: liciter / licitemur / licitentur, etc.
• but the meaning remains active

So licitentur is grammatically built like a passive form, but it means:

• they bid
• they make bids
• they compete in bidding

This is very common in Latin, and English speakers often find it strange at first.

Emptores is nominative plural.

It is the subject of licitentur:

• emptores = the buyers
• licitentur = bid

So emptores licitentur means the buyers bid or the buyers should bid, depending on how you bring the Latin structure into English.

Even though the sentence begins with restat, the people actually doing the action in the subordinate clause are emptores.

Inter se means among themselves, between themselves, or more naturally in English, with one another / against one another.

Breaking it down:

• inter = among, between
• se = themselves

So emptores inter se licitentur means that the buyers are bidding against each other, not just bidding in general.

This phrase is very common in Latin for reciprocal action.

Because se by itself usually refers back reflexively to the subject, meaning themselves, but it does not by itself clearly express the idea of reciprocal interaction.

Inter se specifically means:

• among themselves
• with one another
• against one another

That is exactly the idea needed here: the buyers are not merely acting on themselves; they are competing with each other in bidding.

More or less, yes.

Although restat is formally 3rd person singular, it often works in a nearly impersonal way in expressions like restat ut...:

• it remains that...
• it remains for ... to ...

The real content of what remains is expressed by the following clause, ut emptores inter se licitentur.

So you can think of restat here as a fixed introductory expression rather than as a verb with a concrete noun subject.

The present subjunctive is used because the action is viewed as current or still to be done from the speaker's point of view.

So the sentence means something like:

• it remains for the buyers to bid against one another
• the next thing is for the buyers to bid against one another

The action has not been placed in past time, so the present subjunctive is the natural choice.

A very literal version would be:

• It remains that the buyers bid among themselves.

But that is not very natural English.

A better English rendering would usually be:

• It remains for the buyers to bid against one another.
• All that remains is for the buyers to bid against one another.

So a literal translation is possible for understanding the grammar, but a freer translation is usually better English.

Latin word order is flexible, so the words could be arranged differently without changing the basic grammar.

Here, the order is quite natural:

• Restat first: this highlights the main idea, it remains
• then ut
• then emptores, the subject of the subordinate clause
• then inter se, giving the reciprocal idea
• then licitentur, the verb of that clause

Putting licitentur at the end is especially normal in Latin, since verbs often come last in a clause.

Yes, depending on context, that can be a very good idiomatic translation.

For example, if someone is describing a process or a sequence of events, restat ut... can mean something like:

• the next step is for...
• all that remains is for...
• it only remains for...

So if the surrounding context is practical or procedural, the next step is for the buyers to bid against one another may capture the sense very well.