Ne adversarius quidem amicum fraudat.

Together, ne ... quidem means not even.

A very common Latin pattern is:

• ne
  • emphasized word + quidem = not even + that word

So in:

• Ne adversarius quidem amicum fraudat

the word being emphasized is adversarius, because it stands between ne and quidem. So the sense is:

• not even an opponent / enemy ...

This is one of the most important things to notice in the sentence.

Because that is exactly how the construction works in Latin.

Latin usually places the word being emphasized between them:

• ne X quidem = not even X

So:

• ne adversarius quidem = not even an opponent

English keeps not even together, but Latin often wraps those two words around the word being stressed.

Adversarius is nominative singular, and it is the subject of fraudat.

Reasons:

• The ending -us is the normal nominative singular ending for a 2nd-declension masculine noun.
• The verb fraudat is third person singular, so it needs a singular subject.
• The sentence structure makes best sense with adversarius as the doer of the action.

So:

• adversarius = the opponent / adversary as subject

Amicum is accusative singular, and it is the direct object of fraudat.

That means it receives the action of the verb:

• fraudat amicum = deceives / cheats a friend

For an English speaker, this is a very normal subject-verb-object relationship, even though the Latin word order is not identical to ordinary English order.

Fraudat is present subjunctive active, third person singular of fraudare.

Breakdown:

• verb: fraudare = to cheat, deceive, defraud
• stem: frauda-
• present subjunctive vowel for 1st conjugation: -e-
• 3rd singular ending: -t

So:

• expected indicative: fraudat? No — for 1st conjugation, the present indicative would normally be fraudat only in very old or nonstandard-looking formation?
• but in standard analysis here, the important point is that this is read as a subjunctive in an independent clause with ne, giving a prohibitive/jussive sense.

In practical classroom terms, learners usually understand it as:

• let him not cheat
• he should not cheat
• must not cheat

Because ne with the subjunctive is a standard way to express a negative command, prohibition, or jussive idea in Latin.

So this sentence is not simply stating a fact like:

• an opponent does not cheat a friend

Instead, it expresses what should not happen:

• not even an opponent should cheat a friend
• let not even an opponent cheat a friend

That is why the subjunctive is used.

Here, ne is best understood as part of a negative jussive/prohibitive construction: it helps express should not or must not.

A learner may know ne from clauses meaning lest or so that ... not, but this is different because the sentence stands on its own as an independent clause.

So here it is not introducing a purpose clause. It is helping form a prohibition:

• ne ... fraudat = let ... not cheat / should not cheat

And with quidem, the sentence becomes stronger:

• ne adversarius quidem ... = not even an opponent should ...

Because Latin often leaves that kind of possession unstated when it is not important.

Amicum just means a friend or the friend, depending on context. Latin does not always specify whose friend it is unless that matters.

So the sentence is more general:

• a friend should not be cheated — not even by an opponent

If Latin wanted to be more specific, it could add a possessive such as suum or another genitive/pronoun. But here the statement is broad and moral in tone.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because the endings show the grammatical roles.

In English, we depend heavily on position:

• The opponent cheats the friend
  vs.
• The friend cheats the opponent

In Latin, the endings already tell you who is subject and who is object:

• adversarius = subject
• amicum = object

So the author can arrange words for emphasis. Here the order highlights adversarius through the ne ... quidem pattern.

The sentence is not arranged primarily for basic word order; it is arranged for focus and emphasis.

Yes. Adversarius can mean opponent, adversary, or sometimes enemy, depending on context.

A native English speaker may assume it always means a personal enemy, but it can also refer more broadly to someone on the other side, such as an opponent in argument, politics, or legal conflict.

That matters here because the sentence may be making a general ethical point:

• even someone opposed to you should not act dishonestly toward a friend

So opponent/adversary is often safer than automatically choosing enemy.

Yes, it can.

In this sentence, amicum is the person being cheated or defrauded, so the accusative works as a direct object.

English speakers sometimes expect a preposition, such as cheat someone out of something, but Latin often expresses the idea more directly with an accusative person. Depending on context, Latin may also add the thing involved, but this sentence keeps it simple.

So here:

• amicum fraudat = cheat/deceive a friend

Grammatically, it is best taken as a jussive/prohibitive statement, so it expresses a rule, principle, or exhortation rather than a plain factual statement.

In other words, it means something like:

• Not even an opponent should cheat a friend
• Let not even an opponent cheat a friend

That gives the sentence a moral or proverbial flavor, not just a descriptive one.

Probably these three points:

1. ne ... quidem = not even
2. adversarius is the subject
3. amicum is the object

Once you see that, the whole sentence becomes much easier to understand structurally:

• Ne adversarius quidem = Not even an opponent
• amicum = a friend
• fraudat = should cheat / let ... cheat in a negative-jussive setting

So the sentence is built around an emphasized moral idea: not even an opponent should cheat a friend.