Learn Hardcore Latin: Hodie dies clarus fuit, sed discipuli tamen in schola manserunt. - Today the day was bright, but the students nevertheless stayed in the school.

Grammatically, it’s just an adverb; it does not change its form.
Historically, it comes from hoc die = “on this day,” but in classical Latin it’s written as one word, hodie, and behaves like any other adverb (like heri = yesterday, cras = tomorrow).
Because it’s an adverb of time, it does not need a preposition (you don’t say in hodie or on hodie).

Why is it dies clarus and not dies clara? What gender is dies?

Dies here is masculine, so the adjective must also be masculine: clarus.

Dies, diei is usually a 5th‑declension noun.
Most 5th‑declension nouns are feminine (like res, rei), but dies is masculine in the singular in normal usage.
Therefore, the predicate adjective “bright” must agree in gender, number, and case with dies:
- dies – nominative singular masculine
- clarus – nominative singular masculine to match it

Clara would be nominative singular feminine, which would be wrong here.

Why is the word order dies clarus fuit? Could it also be clarus dies fuit or dies fuit clarus?

All of these orders are possible and grammatically correct:

Dies clarus fuit
Clarus dies fuit
Dies fuit clarus

Latin word order is more flexible than English because the endings show who is doing what.

Subject: dies
Verb: fuit
Predicate adjective: clarus

The basic meaning stays the same: “The day was bright.”
Different orders can slightly shift emphasis, but in a simple sentence like this, any of these is fine and natural. The book’s word order is quite neutral.

What tense is fuit, and why not erat? What’s the difference?

Fuit is 3rd person singular perfect of sum (“to be”): “was / has been.”
Erat is 3rd person singular imperfect: “was (ongoing) / used to be / was being.”

Fuit (perfect) presents the bright day as a completed fact, a kind of summary:
- Hodie dies clarus fuit. = “Today the day was bright” (we look at the day as a whole, completed).
Erat (imperfect) would focus more on the ongoing state in past time:
- Hodie dies clarus erat. = “Today the day was (being) bright” – more like describing a continuous background.

Both can be used, but fuit naturally fits a simple statement summarizing the whole day.

What case is discipuli, and how would it change if only one student stayed?

Discipuli is nominative plural: “students” as the subject of the verb.

Discipulus = “student” (masculine, singular)
- nominative singular: discipulus – “(a) student”
- nominative plural: discipuli – “(the) students”

In the sentence:

Discipuli … manserunt = “The students stayed / remained.”

If only one student stayed, you’d say:

Hodie dies clarus fuit, sed discipulus tamen in schola mansit.
- discipulus = nominative singular
- mansit = perfect, 3rd singular of manere (to stay, remain)

What is tamen, and why do we have both sed and tamen? Aren’t they both “but”?

Sed and tamen are not the same kind of word.

Sed is a coordinating conjunction: “but.”
- It connects two clauses: “X, but Y.”
Tamen is an adverb meaning “however,” “nevertheless,” “still.”
- It adds the sense of contrast or concession inside the second clause.

So in:

… sed discipuli tamen in schola manserunt.
- sed = “but” (introduces the contrast)
- tamen = “nevertheless / still” (highlights that staying in school is surprising given that the day was bright)

You could omit one:

Hodie dies clarus fuit, sed discipuli in schola manserunt.
Hodie dies clarus fuit; discipuli tamen in schola manserunt.

But sed … tamen together is a very natural way in Latin to say:
“The day was bright, but the students still stayed in school.”

Why is tamen after discipuli? Can it go in other positions?

Latin adverbs like tamen are quite mobile. Common positions include:

After the first word in the clause:
- Sed discipuli tamen in schola manserunt. (as in the sentence)
Right after the conjunction:
- Sed tamen discipuli in schola manserunt.
At the very start of the second clause (if you omit sed):
- Hodie dies clarus fuit; tamen discipuli in schola manserunt.

All are grammatically correct.
The position can slightly change emphasis, but doesn’t change the basic meaning “nevertheless / still.”

What case is schola in in schola, and why isn’t it in scholam?

In in schola, schola is ablative singular.

in + ablative = location: “in / on / at” (place where)
- in schola = “in the school” (they are inside the school building).
in + accusative = motion towards: “into / onto” (place to which)
- in scholam = “into the school” (they are going into it).

Since the sentence describes where they stayed, not where they were going, in schola with the ablative is correct.

What tense is manserunt, and how is it different from something like manebant?

Manserunt is 3rd person plural perfect of manere:

manserunt = “they stayed / they remained” (completed action).

Manebant is 3rd person plural imperfect:

manebant = “they were staying / they used to stay / they kept staying” (ongoing or repeated in the past).

In the sentence:

manserunt presents the staying as a simple, completed fact on that day:
- “The students stayed (i.e., they did not leave; they remained there).”
manebant would sound more like describing the ongoing situation:
- “The students were (in the process of) staying in school” – background description.

For a one-day, completed event, the perfect (manserunt) fits best.

What verb is manserunt from, and why doesn’t it look like the present manent?

Manserunt is the perfect tense of manere (“to remain, stay”).

Principal parts of manere:

maneo – I stay
manere – to stay
mansi – I stayed
mansum – (having been) stayed

To form the perfect:

Take the perfect stem from mansi → mans-
Add perfect endings:
- mansi – I stayed
- mansisti – you stayed
- mansit – he/she/it stayed
- mansimus – we stayed
- mansistis – you (pl.) stayed
- manserunt / mansere – they stayed

So manent (present: “they stay”) and manserunt (perfect: “they stayed”) are just different tenses of the same verb.

Could the whole sentence be rearranged, like: Hodie clarus dies fuit, sed tamen discipuli manserunt in schola?

Yes. All of these forms are acceptable Latin:

Hodie dies clarus fuit, sed discipuli tamen in schola manserunt.
Hodie clarus dies fuit, sed tamen discipuli in schola manserunt.
Hodie dies fuit clarus, sed discipuli in schola tamen manserunt.

Latin word order is flexible; the endings tell you the roles.

Changes in order mainly affect style and emphasis, not core meaning. For a beginner, the book’s version is perfectly clear and natural.

Does clarus here mean “clear” or “famous”? What exactly is dies clarus?

Clarus has several meanings, including:

bright, clear (of light, weather)
famous, renowned (of people, reputation)

In context with dies (“day”), clarus almost certainly means “bright / fine” – a day with good, bright weather.

So dies clarus here is best understood as:

“a bright day,” “a fine day,” “a clear day (weather-wise).”

It does not mean “a famous day” in this simple sentence.