Theft Action for City Money and Inapplicability of Peculatus

Notes

1. §47.2.82.prciuitati — A dative of separation (dativus separationis) modifying the participle `subtractam`, meaning "taken/stolen from the city." Under Roman law, the property of a city (ciuitas) was treated analogously to private corporate property (res universitatis) rather than state property (res publica), making its theft subject to civil action.
2. §47.2.82.prob pecuniam ciuitati subtractam — The preposition `ob` (on account of) governs the accusative noun `pecuniam` and its modifying participle `subtractam`. This is a dominant participle construction (akin to ab urbe condita), meaning "on account of the theft of money" rather than literally "on account of the stolen money."
3. §47.2.82.prtenetur — A third-person singular passive indicative; the subject ("the thief") is implied from the context. It is used with the ablatives of instrument/cause `actione` (by an action) and `crimine` (by a charge) to mean "is held liable by/under."
4. §47.2.82.prpeculatus — The genitive singular of the fourth-declension noun `peculatus` (embezzlement of public/sacred money), modifying the ablative `crimine` to form "under the charge of embezzlement."