Pharr section 248 line 7

[Bert]

[face=SPIonic]ou)/ tij )Axaiw=n pro/frwn pei/setai e)/pesin )agame/mnoni a)naidei/hn e)pieime/nw| kai\ kerdaleo/froni[/face]
I think the gist of this line is something like; No one of the Achaeans will eagerly obey the words of Agamemnon who is clothed in shamelessness, and crafty.
I don't understand why Agamemnon is in the dative case.
[face=SPIonic]pei/qomai [/face]takes an object in the dative, that explains [face=SPIonic]e)/pesin[/face].
They are the words of Agamemnon, so why is [face=SPIonic]agame/mnoni [/face]dative instead of genitive?
If I understand why Agamemnon is dative I may understand the next two datives as well. My quess is that they are in apposition to Agamemnon, ie; the one clothed in shamelessness and the sly one.

[annis]

[face=SPIonic]ou)/ tij )Axaiw=n pro/frwn pei/setai e)/pesin )Agame/mnoni a)naidei/hn e)pieime/nw| kai\ kerdaleo/froni[/face]

I would say Agamemnon is in the dative of interest.

"No one of the Achaians will eagerly obey orders for Agamemnon clothed in shamelessness and crafty."

[Bert]

That makes sense. Thank you.

[Paul]

Hi Bert,

You, William, and I discussed this issue once before in http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... .php?t=557

I think it's safe to say that the dative of interest can also function as a kind of possessive. On this see Smyth 1474-1480. See also Pharr 1000 and Iliad 1.150 whence Pharr 248.7.

Cordially,

Paul

[Bert]

Paul, you are right.
I was aware of the dative of interest but somehow it didn't occur to me that this was it. It was good to read that discussion again. I also remember another discussion on this point of a dative being used as a possesive.
See
http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... .php?t=963
If I have my memory jogged often enough, it may stick.
Thank you.