Serva epistulas veteres in cista invenit et eas dominae tradit.

Because epistulas is the direct object of invenit: it is what the serva finds. The accusative is the normal case for the direct object in Latin.

It is also the thing later referred to by eas in the second part of the sentence.

Because veteres has to agree with epistulas.

• epistulas = feminine accusative plural
• veteres = feminine accusative plural

The adjective vetus, veteris belongs to the 3rd declension, so its forms do not look like 1st/2nd-declension adjectives such as bonus, bona, bonum.

Latin adjective position is flexible. An adjective can come before or after its noun. So epistulas veteres simply means old letters.

English learners often expect one fixed order, but Latin is much freer. The endings, not the position, show which words belong together.

Here cista is ablative singular: in cista.

That is because in with the ablative usually means in or on in the sense of location:

• in cista = in the box
• in mensa = on the table

If there were movement into the box, Latin would usually use the accusative instead:

• in cistam = into the box

Eas means them, and it refers back to epistulas.

Its form tells you that it is:

• feminine
• accusative
• plural

That matches epistulas, which is also feminine accusative plural. Latin pronouns usually agree with the noun they refer to in gender and number, and they take whatever case their job in the new clause requires.

Yes, Latin often omits pronouns when the meaning is already clear. But here eas is helpful because it clearly shows that the thing being handed over is the letters already mentioned.

So the pronoun is not strictly necessary, but it makes the connection explicit and smooth.

Because dominae is dative singular here, and the dative commonly marks the indirect object, the person receiving something.

So:

• eas = them = direct object
• dominae = to the mistress = indirect object

Latin often does not need a separate word for to, because the case ending already gives that meaning.

Yes, as a form by itself, dominae could be:

• dative singular
• genitive singular
• nominative plural

But in this sentence, the verb tradit strongly suggests a recipient, so dominae is best understood as dative singular: to the mistress.

This is a very common feature of Latin: one form can have several possible grammatical functions, and context tells you which one is correct.

Tradit is clearly present tense: she hands over or she delivers.

Invenit is trickier. In ordinary spelling without vowel marks, invenit can represent either:

• present: she finds
• perfect: she found

If macrons are written, the perfect is invēnit. So in a sentence without macrons, you must use context or the given translation to decide.

Because tradit is present, many beginner texts intend invenit here as present too: she finds ... and hands them over.

Latin usually does not need to state subject pronouns such as she, because the verb ending already shows the person and number.

Both invenit and tradit end in -t, which tells you the subject is 3rd person singular: he/she/it. Since serva is already named, adding a separate pronoun would usually be unnecessary.

It is unusual by English standards, but normal for Latin. Latin word order is much more flexible because case endings show grammatical function.

English depends heavily on order:

• The girl sees the dog is different from The dog sees the girl

Latin depends much more on endings:

• serva shows the subject
• epistulas shows the object
• dominae shows the indirect object

So Latin can move words around for emphasis or style without changing the basic meaning.

Tradit comes from trado, tradere, which means hand over, deliver, pass on, or entrust, depending on context.

So here it is more specific than a simple gives. The idea is that the servant finds the letters and then hands them over to the mistress.