Nauta qui Rhodum viderat dicit portum eius tutissimum esse.

Some Latin nouns referring to jobs or roles that were usually male are first declension even though they are masculine in gender. Nauta is one of these.

So:

• nauta = first declension in form
• but masculine in gender

That means it declines like a first-declension noun, but adjectives or pronouns referring to it will be masculine if needed.

Qui refers back to nauta.

So nauta qui Rhodum viderat means:

• the sailor
• who had seen Rhodes

Because nauta is singular masculine nominative, qui is also singular masculine nominative.

This is a relative clause, and qui is the subject of viderat.

Rhodum is accusative singular, and it is the direct object of viderat.

• videre = to see
• You see something, so that thing goes into the accusative
• therefore: Rhodum viderat = had seen Rhodes

No preposition is needed because Rhodes is not showing motion here; it is simply the thing seen.

Viderat is the pluperfect of video.

It means had seen, not just saw.

The pluperfect shows that this seeing happened before the time of dicit:

• first, the sailor saw Rhodes
• later, he says something about its harbor

So the timeline is:

1. viderat = he had seen
2. dicit = he says

Because the main verb and the relative clause do not have to be in the same tense.

• viderat tells us about an earlier action: the sailor had seen Rhodes
• dicit tells us what he is saying now (or in the present of the narrative)

Latin often mixes tenses this way very naturally when the time relationship requires it.

Because after a verb of saying like dicit, Latin usually uses an indirect statement.

The pattern is:

• accusative subject
  • infinitive

So:

• portum = the subject of the indirect statement, in the accusative
• tutissimum = predicate adjective agreeing with portum
• esse = infinitive to be

Literally, Latin says something like:

• the sailor says the harbor of it to be very safe

Natural English turns that into:

• The sailor says that its harbor is very safe

So Latin does not usually use quod ... est here; it prefers the accusative-and-infinitive construction.

Because in an indirect statement, the subject of the infinitive goes into the accusative.

Even though in English the harbor would be the subject of is, Latin makes it accusative because it is the subject of esse inside indirect statement.

Compare:

• Direct statement: Portus tutissimus est = The harbor is very safe
• Indirect statement after dicit: dicit portum tutissimum esse = he says that the harbor is very safe

So portum is accusative because of the construction, not because it is a direct object of dicit.

Tutissimum is the superlative form of tutus.

• tutus = safe
• tutior = safer
• tutissimus = safest / very safe

Here tutissimum is:

• masculine singular
• accusative singular

because it agrees with portum.

Depending on context, a Latin superlative can mean either:

• the safest
• or simply very safe

So portum eius tutissimum esse can mean that its harbor is the safest or that its harbor is very safe, depending on how strongly you want to bring out the superlative.

This is a very common learner question.

• suus, -a, -um usually refers back to the subject of its own clause
• eius means his/her/its, referring to someone or something else

In portum eius tutissimum esse, the subject of the infinitive clause is portum, not nauta and not Rhodos in the nominative. Latin uses eius to mean its, referring to Rhodus.

So:

• portum eius = its harbor, meaning the harbor of Rhodes

If Latin used suum here, it would suggest a reflexive relationship within the clause, which is not what is wanted.

Latin does not have separate forms for his, her, and its in this pronoun.

Eius can mean:

• his
• her
• its

The exact meaning comes from context. Here the nearest sensible referent is Rhodus (Rhodes), so eius means its.

It breaks down like this:

• Nauta = the sailor
• qui Rhodum viderat = who had seen Rhodes
• dicit = says
• portum eius tutissimum esse = that its harbor is very safe / the safest

So the sentence has:

1. a main noun: nauta
2. a relative clause modifying it: qui Rhodum viderat
3. a main verb: dicit
4. an indirect statement: portum eius tutissimum esse

That is a very common Latin sentence pattern.

For English, yes; for Latin, not really.

Latin word order is much freer than English word order because endings show grammatical function. This sentence is arranged quite naturally:

• Nauta comes first as the main person being talked about
• qui Rhodum viderat immediately follows to describe that sailor
• dicit introduces the main statement
• portum eius tutissimum esse comes after it as the content of what he says

A more mechanical English-like order might be:

• Nauta dicit portum eius tutissimum esse, qui Rhodum viderat

but that would be worse Latin, because the relative clause normally stands close to the noun it modifies.

So the word order here is actually clear and idiomatic.

No. Here qui is simply the relative pronoun meaning who.

Learners sometimes get confused because some Latin relative words can have slightly different nuances in certain contexts, but in this sentence the meaning is straightforward:

• nauta qui Rhodum viderat = the sailor who had seen Rhodes

There is no causal sense here.

In this sentence, esse is normally expressed because it is part of the indirect statement construction.

• portum eius tutissimum esse = that its harbor is very safe

Latin can sometimes omit forms of esse in certain styles or contexts, especially in compact writing, but in a standard sentence like this, keeping esse is normal and expected.

So for a learner, it is best to understand this as the full regular pattern:

• accusative subject
  • predicate
    • infinitive

Qui is nominative singular masculine.

We know this because:

1. it refers to nauta, which is singular masculine
2. it is the subject of viderat

If it were the object, we would expect quem instead.

So:

• qui viderat = who had seen
• not whom he had seen