Hi, my name is Paul, and I have a question about Ex. 6B, part 1. in Bradley's Arnold (I am working through the Mountford edition on my own, using an answer key from an older edition to check my work). The sentence to translate begins "You and I were, he replied, in the country with your brother, and would not return to Naples on the first of August. . . ." The answer key starts the translation to Latin in this way: "Respondit ille me et te ruri esse apud fratrem tuum nec Neapolim Kalendis Sextilibus redituros esse. . . ." I am wondering two things: 1) I am quite sure that "ille" is not necessary, but is it better style to add it than to just use "respondit" alone for some reason? 2) Why is it "esse" and not "fuisse?" It seems to me that "fuisse" would be better because the speaker is referring to a time previous to the time he is speaking in. I hope this makes sense, thanks to all who give this a shot.