Amadeus omnibus sodalibus s.p.d.,
Good news, the second volume "Roma Aeterna" arrived in the mail last week, and it is very exciting. Bad news, saepe memoria me fallit and I had to go over the subjunctive in Familia Romana. But, alas, Hans Orberg doesn't give much grammatical explanations for coniunctivus narrativus nor coniunctivus causalis, and I need some help. But first, I found this line in Cap. XXXIII v. 142, with absolutely no explanation either in Fam Rom. or the Exercitia:
"H?c proeli? fact?, dux victor, cum ? mīlitibus imper?tor salūt?tus esset, virtūtem nostram laud?vit 'quod contr? hostēs numer? superi?res fortissimē
pugnavissēmus'; 'tot hominibus ūn? proeli? ?missīs, hostēs brevī arma positūr?s esse' dīxit."
Question, where did this coniuntivus pluscuamperfectus come from? Shouldn't it be
pugnavimus? 
I searched my Collar & Daniell, and I found that there's a coniunctivus inside indirect discourse, but this is not the case here, as the indirect discourse comes after the first endquote. Thoughts, anyone?
Second, can anyone explain to me the difference between con. narrativus and con. causalis? The sentence
"Caesar, cum id nūnti?tum esset, in Galliam contendit"
which is taken from my Collar & Daniell, "describes the circumstances under which Caesar was
impelled to hasten into Gaul". This temporal "cum" translated into Orbergian would be "dum... nuntiatum est" (cf. Familia Romana cap. XXIX v. 78 ). However, couldn't this "cum" also mean
cause, quia?
Finally, how does this sentence not describe circumstances but only "fixes the time" (something which I still don't know what it means):
"Cum Caesar in Itali? erat, bellum in Galli? ortum est."
Hope this all makes sense.
Valete, cari amici!
Lisa: Relax?! I can't relax! Nor can I yield, relent, or... Only two synonyms? Oh my God! I'm losing my perspicacity! Aaaaa!
Homer: Well it's always in the last place you look.