I don’t understand the meaning of the dative Πριάμῳ. Is the idea “by means of Priam,” so that we handed Priam the golden scepters and said, “Hey, Priam, could you take these to the house?” That seems odd, since Priam is a big shot, not someone’s errand boy. Is it showing that Priam is the beneficiary of the action, so the scepters would be Priam’s, and we’re sending them to a house (presumably his house) because he’d want his scepters back? Is the dative being used in some unusual way to mean a possessive, so “Priam’s house?” Am I not recognizing the case correctly?
BDAG has: “2. to dispatch someth. through an intermediary, send τινί τι someth. to someone”
So, wouldn’t it mean “we sent the golden sceptres to Priam for the house” (perhaps the royal house, or a temple)?
My understanding is that possession is sometimes expressed using the dative (plus a copulative verb):
Examples:
ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάνης (John 1:6) “whose name [was] John”; μόνῳ γάρ ἐστι τοῦτ’ ἐμοὶ γέρας βροτῶν (Eur., Hipp., 84), “for I alone of mortals have this privilege”; θασραλέον νύ οἱ ἦτορ ἐνὶ φρεσίν (Homer, Iliad, XIX, 169) “his heart within him is of good cheer”.
I think it’s important to remember that in these exercises, many of the sentences are made up and don’t necessarily agree with the actual text of the Iliad, so trying to contextualise a practice sentence may not help in trying to determine a particular case usage. The dative is often translated simply as “to” or “for” to show its use with indirect objects. Up to this point in the text, the only reference Pharr has made to use of the dative is Para. 996, which doesn’t apply here. However, if you look in the Paradigms, starting at Para. 659, you’ll see how Pharr translates each of the cases. I think this is all he’s looking for. Pick a translation that fits and go with it.