Pater dicit pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere.

Because Latin often uses an accusative-and-infinitive construction instead of a that-clause.

So instead of saying:

• Father says that preserving peace is better than fearing war

Latin says, more literally:

• Father says preserving peace to be better than fearing war

That is why you get:

• dicit ... melius esse

with esse in the infinitive, not a finite verb like est.

Each infinitive has a different job here:

• servare = to preserve / preserving
• esse = to be
• timere = to fear / fearing

The main reporting verb is dicit (he says). After verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, and the like, Latin commonly puts the reported statement into an infinitive construction.

Here the core reported statement is:

• pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere
• to preserve peace to be better than to fear war

In smoother English: preserving peace is better than fearing war.

So:

• servare and timere are the two actions being compared.
• esse links melius with the first infinitive phrase: to preserve peace is better.

Because pacem is the direct object of servare.

• pax = peace, as a nominative form
• pacem = peace, as an accusative form

Since servare means to preserve / keep, it takes an object:

• pacem servare = to preserve peace

The same thing happens with bellum:

• bellum timere = to fear war

Both nouns are accusative because they are objects of infinitives.

For the same reason as pacem: it is the direct object of timere.

• timere = to fear
• bellum = war in the accusative singular

So:

• bellum timere = to fear war

This is a very common pattern in Latin: verb + accusative object, even when the verb is an infinitive.

Because melius is the neuter comparative form of bonus and is often used impersonally to mean better.

Latin often uses the neuter comparative adverbially or in general judgments:

• melius est = it is better

Here, because the statement is in indirect discourse, est becomes esse:

• melius esse = to be better

You do not get melior here because melior is masculine/feminine nominative singular, used to describe a specific masculine or feminine noun. But this sentence is making a general comparison between two actions:

• preserving peace
• fearing war

So the neuter melius is the natural form.

Because melius needs the idea of is or to be here.

The full thought is:

• preserving peace is better than fearing war

In Latin, that becomes:

• pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere

Since this whole statement depends on dicit, Latin changes est to esse in indirect statement.

Without esse, the sentence would feel incomplete.

Quam means than and introduces the second half of the comparison.

So:

• melius esse quam bellum timere
• to be better than to fear war

The comparison is between two infinitive phrases:

• pacem servare = preserving peace
• bellum timere = fearing war

So quam links the two actions being compared.

Not grammatically, at least not directly.

Pater is clearly the subject of dicit:

• Pater dicit = Father says

Inside the reported statement, the actions servare and timere are presented more generally:

• preserving peace is better than fearing war

This is not the same as saying:

• Father says that he preserves peace
• or Father says that someone fears war

The infinitives here name actions in a general way, like English preserving and fearing.

So pater is the speaker, not necessarily the explicit subject of the infinitives.

Because this sentence is not really saying that someone does something; it is making a general judgment about two actions.

In many accusative-and-infinitive constructions, you do get an accusative subject:

• Pater dicit filium venire = Father says that the son is coming

Here, though, the statement is more like:

• to preserve peace is better than to fear war

That kind of general statement does not need an explicit accusative subject. The infinitive phrases themselves act like abstract verbal nouns in English: preserving peace, fearing war.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order, because Latin uses endings to show grammatical relationships.

This sentence puts the main verb early:

• Pater dicit ...

Then it gives the reported statement:

• pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere

A very literal breakdown is:

• Father says peace to preserve better to be than war to fear

That sounds strange in English, but in Latin the endings make the structure clear:

• pacem and bellum are objects
• servare, esse, timere are infinitives
• melius marks the comparison

Latin often places important words, especially the verb esse or a comparative idea, in positions that feel more flexible than in English.

Yes, but only if the sentence were direct, not dependent on dicit.

Direct statement:

• Pacem servare melius est quam bellum timere.
• Preserving peace is better than fearing war.

After dicit, Latin normally changes that statement into indirect discourse:

• Pater dicit pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere.

So:

• est = direct statement
• esse = indirect statement after dicit

It can mean to preserve peace, to keep peace, or to maintain peace, depending on context.

The verb servare often means:

• to keep
• to preserve
• to maintain
• to protect

So pacem servare is a natural Latin expression for maintaining or preserving a state of peace.

Yes. Depending on the English style you want, bellum timere could be translated as:

• to fear war
• to be afraid of war
• fearing war

In this sentence, English often sounds most natural with gerunds:

• Father says that preserving peace is better than fearing war

But the basic Latin form is still infinitive-based.

A useful way to see it is:

• Pater = subject
• dicit = main verb
• pacem servare melius esse quam bellum timere = reported statement in indirect discourse

And inside that reported statement:

• pacem servare = first action
• melius esse = is better
• quam bellum timere = than the second action

So the sentence works as:

• Father says [that preserving peace is better than fearing war].