Sources for the Deuterocanon

For Daniel 10, I read the DSS Bible, DSS English Bible, KJV, NET with Constable's notes, Synodal, NETS, the first and only two pages of the S.R.I.'s "Chapter 11", Brenton LXX, Church Slavonic, and OSB translations. I've been doing this with Daniel 1-9 as well.

Daniel 10:14's ending comes off a bit confusing in the NET's notes, as to whether it says "days" or "days to come", although the natural sense is the latter.

The Hebrew says:
ובאתי להבינך את אשר־יקרה לעמך באחרית הימים כי־עוד חזון לימים׃

וּבָ֙אתִי֙ / ū·ḇā·ṯî / Now I have come | לַהֲבִ֣ינְךָ֔ / La-Ha-bineka / to make you understand | אֲשֶׁר־ אֵ֛ת / Et (preposition marking an object)

אֲשֶׁר־ / Asher / what | יִקְרָ֥ה / yiqrah / will happen | לְעַמְּךָ֖ / Le-ammeka / to your people | בְּאַחֲרִ֣ית / Be-aharit / in the latter

הַיָּמִ֑ים / hay·yā·mîm / days | כִּי־ / ki / for | ע֥וֹד / owd / yet | חָז֖וֹן / ḥā·zō·wn / the vision | לַיָּמִֽים׃ / lay·yā·mîm / to days
This literally runs:
"Now I have come to make you understand what will happen to your people in the latter days, for yet the vision to days."

This last phrase לימים / layyamin shows up in Ezekiel 22:14:
"Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands be strong, in the days (לַיָּמִ֕ים / lay-ya-mim) that I shall deal with thee? I the Lord have spoken it, and will do it."

The key word here is (יוֹם "yom"), meaning "day".

The KJV has for Dan. 10:14:
Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.
The NET version has:
Now I have come to help you understand what will happen to your people in future days, for the vision pertains to days to come.[33]
[33] Translator's Note: Heb “days.”

It seems that the NET version interprets the literal phrase "for yet the vision to days" to mean "for the vision [relates to / is for] days yet [to be]."
That is, the NET takes the word "yet" to mean that the days are "yet"/"still" to be, and it interprets the word "to" to mean "for", and it sees the words "is" and "to be" as implicit. This seems like the most reasonable interpretation to me.

Theodotion's Greek version apparently uses a rather literal translation into Greek, as does the Old Greek Version. Here is the NETS translation of those two Greek versions:
Theodotion's Version
"...and I have come to instruct you about what will meet your people at the end of days, because the vision is yet for days."
Old Greek Version
"And he said to me, 'I have come to explain to you that it will come upon your people at the end of days, for a vision is yet for days."

I also considered other potential ancient texts related to Daniel.
Archaeologists found an ancient artifact in Ugarit with a Canaanite legend from before Moses' time about "Danel" and his son Aqhat. I read a copy of the text.

The name "Daniel" also comes up in 1 Chron. 3:1 as a name for David's second son, Daniel, by Abigail. In 2 Sam. 2:3, David's second son, by Abigail, is named Chileab.

In Ezekiel 14 and 28, Ezekiel refers to both "Danel" and "Daniel", using both spellings, and it's not obvious whether Ezekiel is referring to the ancient Canaanite "Danel," to the 6th century Jewish exile in Babylon named "Daniel," or to both. My impression is that Ezekiel is alluding to both figures. I made a thread about it here:

The Dead Sea Scrolls have both such Biblical references to Daniel, as well as a few nonBiblical stories likely related to him.

1st Enoch has a character named Daniel and the 7 year cycle concept. The books of the Maccabees make reference to Daniel, as do the NT and Josephus. I imagine that early Church Fathers and Rabbinic writings also refer to Daniel.

The name Daniel also comes up in Ezra 8:2 and Nehemiah 10:6 regarding the period soon after the end of the Babylonian exile. Ezra 8 gives a list of priests returning from Babylon to Judah, and "Daniel" is the name of a returning priest descended from Ithamar, Aaron's younger son. In Nehemiah 9-10, leaders of Judea, including one named "Daniel" made and sealed a covenant with the Lord.

Kingston Tong proposes that Daniel might have returned from exile to Judah with Zerubbabel in 537 BC, but that the time of the return of the group of exiles in Ezra 8:2 and Nehemiah 10 would have been after the prophet Daniel's lifespan:
It is more likely that Daniel may have returned with Zerubabbel.

Here is a proposed timeline for one’s consideration from the NIV Bible.

586 BCE the Fall of Jerusalem
539 BCE the Fall of Babylon and the Rise of the Persian Empire (Ezra. 1:1–4)
537 BCE the Return of Sheshbazzar (Ezr. 1:11).
530–520 BCE the Temple stopped and completed (Ezr. 6:15).
458 BCE the return of Ezra to Jerusalem (Ezr. 7:6–9).
444 BCE the return of Nehemiah and rebuilding the Wall (Neh. 2:1–11, 6:15).

Among the Jews taken into captivity, Daniel and his three friends were considered young and smart men (Dan. 1:3–7). It is likely that the youths were in their teens. Daniel recalls or reads that Israel had 70 years of captivity (Dan. 9:1–3). That time period was drawing near. In Ezra 1:1 Cyrus decrees that the exiled people can returned to their lands. This would mean that Daniel would be in his eighties in his age. Ezra returns in 458 BCE. The time difference from 586 BCE to 458 BCE would be at least 150 years.
Ezra 8:1-2 says, according to the KJV:
Ezra 8
1. These are now the chief of their fathers, and this is the genealogy of them that went up with me from Babylon, in the reign of Artaxerxes the king.
2. Of the sons of Phinehas; Gershom: of the sons of Ithamar; Daniel: of the sons of David; Hattush.
3. Of the sons of Shechaniah, of the sons of Pharosh; Zechariah: and with him were reckoned by genealogy of the males an hundred and fifty.

The NET Bible on the other hand groups Ezra 8:2 with the beginning of Ezra 8:3, which makes it more clear that Daniel is "from the descendants of Ithamar":
1. These are the leaders[1] and those enrolled with them by genealogy who were coming up with me from Babylon during the reign of King Artaxerxes:
2. from the descendants of Phinehas, Gershom;
from the descendants of Ithamar, Daniel;
from the descendants of David, Hattush 3. the son of Shecaniah;
from the descendants of Parosh, Zechariah, and with him were enrolled by genealogy 150 men;

[1] Heb “the heads of their families.”
[2] The MT reads here “from the sons of Shecaniah” with no descendant identified in what follows, contrary to the pattern of the context elsewhere. However, it seems better to understand the first phrase of v. 3 with the end of v. 2; the phrase would then modify the name “Hattush.” This understanding requires emending the reading מִבְּנֵי (mibbne, “from the sons of”) in the MT to בֵּן (ben, “[the] son of”). Cf. NAB, TEV, CEV, NLT.
The Greek LXX, according to the NETS version, has for Ezra 8:
1. And these are the chiefs of their paternal families, the guides who went up with me in the reign of Arthasastha, the king of Babylon:
2. of Phinees' sons, Gersom; of Ithamar's sons, Daniel; of Dauid's sons, Hattous; 3. of Sachania's sons; ...
The LXX's phrase "of Sachania's sons" is in verse 3 like the MT and KJV, which say "from the sons of Shecaniah", rather than the NET's verse 3: "the son of Shecaniah."

Gill's Exposition of Ezra 8:2 proposes that the Daniel in verse 2 is not the famous prophet Daniel. Gill writes:
Of the sons of Phinehas; Gershom: of the sons of Ithamar; Daniel,.... Not Daniel the prophet, he was of the royal blood, and of the tribe of Judah; this was a priest, a descendant of Ithamar, as Gershom was of Eleazar in the line of Phinehas:
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges says about Ezra 8:2:
Daniel represented the line or family of Ithamar, Aaron’s younger son, and gave his name to a house (see Nehemiah 10:6). His name appears as Gamael in 1Es 8:29. [ie. in the Deuterocanonical book "Esdras A"] From this mention of “the sons of Ithamar we gather that the priesthood was not, as Ezekiel required (Ezekiel 43:19, Ezekiel 45:15) limited to the line of Zadok.

That Gershom and Daniel were not the only two priests, but heads of two ‘fathers’ houses’, is shown by Ezra 8:24.
The excerpt above refers to 1 Es. 8:29, which reads in the Brenton LXX:
Of the sons of Phinees, Gerson: of the sons of Ithamar, Gamael: of the sons of David, Lettus the son of Sechenias:
The "Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament" says for Eza 8:2:
Priests and descendants of David. Of priests, Gershom of the sons of Phinehas, and Daniel of the sons of Ithamar. Gershom and Daniel are the names of heads of priestly houses, and "sons of Phinehas and sons of Ithamar" designations of races. Phinehas was the son of the high priest Eleazar, the son of Aaron, and Ithamar a younger son of Aaron, 1 Chronicles 6:4 and 1 Chronicles 6:3. This does not signify that only the two priests Gershom and Daniel went up with Ezra; for in Ezra 8:24 he chose twelve from among the chief of the priests, who went up with him, to have charge of the gifts (Bertheau). The meaning is, that Gershom and Daniel, two heads of priestly houses, went up, and that the house of Gershom belonged to the race of Phinehas, and that of Daniel to the race of Ithamar. A Daniel is named among the priests in Nehemiah 10:7, but whether he is identical with the Daniel in question does not appear.

The ESV Study Bible notes:
“The party that returned with Ezra was a considerable addition to the community in Judah. It is numbered here according to the heads of their fathers’ houses, i.e., heads of families…Their genealogy refers to their formal registration in the list of those returning (as in v. 3, registered, which translates the same Hb word). There are two priestly divisions, namely, Phinehas (v. 2; son of Eleazar, Num 25:7) and Ithamar (Ezra 8:2; see Ex 28:1). These were the remaining sons of Aaron following the judgment on Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1-7). Ezra himself was of the line of Phinehas (Ezra 7:5). Daniel (8:2) is otherwise unknown, and is not the Daniel who was carried off to Babylon in 605 BC (see Dan 1:1,6…) for this is now 458…A third division is a line of David (8:2; for Hattush, see 1 Chron 3:22). Ezra’s party therefore aims to replenish the priesthood, and perhaps also to renew the claims of the Davidic house to rule in Judah.”

John Joseph Collins, in his book The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel notes that Daniel, Azariah, Hananiah, and Mishael are all the names of post-exilic figures in the Book of Nehemiah. Collins concludes that these must be figures who share the names of Daniel and his three companions in the Book of Daniel, but that these two sets of figures cannot be the same because of the time gap between them:
Scholars who wish to secure for Daniel a foothold in history, however tenuous, relate him to the priest Daniel, of the sons of Itharnar, who is mentioned in Ezra 8:2 as one of those who went up from Babylonia to Jerusalem in the reign of Artaxerxes the king, or the Daniel who is mentioned in Neh 10:6 (possibly the same person) • [2] It is further noted that the names of Daniel's companions, Azariah, Hananiah and Mishael, are also attested in the book of Nehemiah. Neh 8:7 mentions a Levite named Azariah and the name is also listed in Neh 10:2. One of the people who stood with Ezra for the reading of the law in Neh 8:4 was named Mishael. The name Hananiah is listed in Neh 10:23. These references prove that the names of Daniel and his companions were names which were used by the Jews in the fifth century, but nothing more. Nothing is said of these individuals which might suggest affinity with the heroes of the book of Daniel, and in any case the court-tales claim to be set in the exile, a century before the time of Nehemiah.
In the KJV, Nehemiah 10 says:
1. Now those that sealed were, Nehemiah, the Tirshatha, the son of Hachaliah, and Zidkijah,
2. Seraiah, Azariah, Jeremiah,
3. Pashur, Amariah, Malchijah,
4. Hattush, Shebaniah, Malluch,
5. Harim, Meremoth, Obadiah,
6. Daniel, Ginnethon, Baruch,
7. Meshullam, Abijah, Mijamin,
8. Maaziah, Bilgai, Shemaiah: these were the priests.
9. And the Levites: both Jeshua the son of Azaniah, Binnui of the sons of Henadad, Kadmiel;

In the NET version, Nehemiah 10 begins:
1. On the sealed documents were the following names [1]: Nehemiah the governor, son of Hacaliah, along with Zedekiah,
2. Seraiah, Azariah, Jeremiah,
3. Pashhur, Amariah, Malkijah,
4. Hattush, Shebaniah, Malluch,
5. Harim, Meremoth, Obadiah,
6. Daniel, Ginnethon, Baruch,
7. Meshullam, Abijah, Mijamin,
8. Maaziah, Bilgai, and Shemaiah. These were the priests.

[1] The words “were the following names” are not in the Hebrew text but have been supplied in the translation for clarity. Cf. vv. 9, 10, 14.

Constable's Notes:
The names in verses 2-8 are those of the heads of 21 priestly families (cf. 12:12-21).
In the Greek LXX version of Nehemiah, which it allocates to the book of "Esdras A," the name "Daniel" also appears in the same list of names as in the MT of Nehemiah.

The Pulpit Commentary talks about how the Book of Nehemiah includes post-exilic figures with the names of Daniel and his 3 companions:
In Ezra 8:2 a Daniel is mentioned who seems to be a son of Ithamar. We say "seems to be," because it is evident that there is an omission somewhere of a name; if the omission has taken place before m'bne Phinhas, then Daniel becomes the representative of the sons of David, and Hattush the representative of the sons of Pabath. In Nehemiah 10:6 in the number of the priests who sealed the covenant, is a "Daniel" named, who may be the same as the preceding. In the LXX. version of the apocryphal additions to Daniel, the prophet is identified with the priest. The first verse in the story of Bel and the Dragon is, "There was a certain man, a priest, whose name was Daniel, the son of Abal, the familiar friend of the King of Babylon." There is nothing to make it certain, it we do not take the phrase here in its absolute sense, that Daniel did not belong to the family of Aaron; if we take the phrase in its restricted sense, then the balance of probability is that he was a member of the Davidic family.

Hananiah (Hananyah; Greek, Ἀνανίας: the Hebrew form, as in the case of other names with the same termination, is sometimes lengthened to Hananyahu). The name means "The Lord Jehovah is gracious." This name is one of the most common in the Bible. Sometimes it is reversed, and becomes Jehohanan or Johanan, and hence "John." The earliest is the head of the sixteenth of the twenty-four courses into which David divided the Hemanites (2 Chronicles 25:4). In the reign of Uzziah there appears one as a chief captain (2 Chronicles 26:11). In Jeremiah there are three; most prominent, however, is the false prophet who declared that Jeconiah and all his fellow-captives would be brought back in the space of two years (Jeremiah 28:15). One of the ancestors of our Lord, called in Luke (Luke 3:27) Joanna, the son of Rhess, grandson of Zerubbabel, is called in 1 Chronicles 3:19 Hananiah, and reckoned a son of Zerubbabel. In the Book of Nehemiah there are several persons spoken of as bearing this name, not impossibly as many as six. In New Testament times it was still common: Ananias the husband of Sapphira (Acts 5:1); the devout Jew of Damascus, sent to Paul (Acts 9:10); the high priest in the time of Paul (Acts 23:2).

Unlike Hananiah, Mishael is one of the rarer names It occurs as the name of one of the sons of Uzziel, the uncle of Moses and Aaron (Exodus 6:22; Leviticus 10:4), and again as one who stood at Ezra's left hand when he read the Law (Nehemiah 8:4). There is some question as to the meaning of the name. Two interpretations have been suggested; the simplest and most direct is, "Who is what God is;" the other is, "Who is like God." The objection to the first is that the contracted relative is employed, which does not elsewhere appear in this book. This, however, is not insuperable, as the contracted form of the relative was in common use in the northern kingdom, and might, therefore, appear in a name; the objection to the second is that a letter is omitted, but such omissions continually occur. Hitzig refers to ימים, from יום, as a case in point.

Azariah, "Jehovah is Helper," is, like Hananiah, a very common name throughout Jewish history It is the name by which Uzziah is called in 2 Kings 14:21: 15:1, 7, 8, 17 (called Uzziah in vers. 13, 30, as also in 2 Chronicles 27.) It is the name of four high priests:

(1) one (1 Chronicles 6:10)during the reign of Solomon, the grandson of Zadok;
(2) the high priest during the reign of Jehoshaphat (1 Chronicles 6:11);
(3) high priest during the reign of his namesake Azariah or Uzziah King of Judah (2 Chronicles 26:17-20);
(4) high priest in the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 31:10-14).

There is also a prophet of this name (2 Chronicles 15:1) in the days of Asa King of Judah. While this name is so common before the Captivity, it is not so common after it, though there is a captain of the army of Judas Maccabteus called "Azarias." While all the names contain the name of God, either in the covenant form "Jehovah" or the common form "el," yet there is nothing in the names to suggest the history before us. Jewish tradition made them out to be of the royal family; of this there is no certainty.

In Daniel 11, it was curious for me whom the Kings of the North and South referred to. Daniel 11 (KJV) says:
2. And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.

3. And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.

4. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.

5. And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.
In this passage, based on the story earlier in Daniel about Greece succeeding Persia as a great kingdom, the king in Dan. 11:3 would be a mighty king of Greece - historically, Alexander the Macedonian. Then since verse 4 says that his kingdom will be divided to the 4 winds of heaven, it makes sense that the Kings of the North and South would be ruling the north and south divisions of Alexander's kingdom.

The identities of the rulers in Daniel 11 after Darius the Mede are unstated. Below I will give Constable's identifications in the NET version:
Verse 2 says:
Three more kings will arise for Persia. Then a fourth king will be unusually rich, more so than all who preceded him."
Constable notes:
"Perhaps these three more kings are Cambyses (ca. 530-522 b.c.), Pseudo-Smerdis (ca. 522 b.c.), and Darius I Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 b.c.)."
"This fourth king is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 b.c.)."

Verse 3: "Then a powerful king will arise, exercising great authority and doing as he pleases."
Note: Alexander the Great (ca. 336-323 b.c.).

Verse 5: “Then the king of the south and one of his subordinates will grow strong."
The king of the south is Ptolemy I Soter (ca. 323-285 b.c.). The following reference to one of his subordinates apparently has in view Seleucus I Nicator (ca. 311-280 b.c.). Throughout the remainder of chap. 11 the expressions “king of the south” and “king of the north” repeatedly occur. It is clear, however, that these terms are being used generically to describe the Ptolemaic king (i.e., “of the south”) or the Seleucid king (i.e., “of the north”) who happens to be in power at any particular time.

Verse 6: "After some years have passed, they will form an alliance. Then the daughter of the king of the south will come to the king of the north to make an agreement, but she will not retain her power, nor will he continue in his strength. She, together with the one who brought her, her child, and her benefactor will all be delivered over at that time."
Here they refers to Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 b.c.) and Antiochus II Theos (ca. 262-246 b.c.).
Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 b.c.), as the Seleucid king.

Verse 7: “There will arise in his place one from her family line who will come against their army..."
The reference is to the king of Egypt.
The reference to one from her family line is probably to Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes (ca. 246-221 b.c.).

Verse 10: "His sons will wage war, mustering a large army that will advance like an overflowing river and carrying the battle all the way to the enemy’s fortress."
Note: "The sons of Seleucus II Callinicus were Seleucus III Ceraunus (ca. 227-223 b.c.) and Antiochus III the Great (ca. 223-187 b.c.)."

Verse 11: "Then the king of the south will be enraged and will march out to fight against the king of the north"
Note: "This king of the south refers to Ptolemy IV Philopator (ca. 221-204 b.c.)."

Verse 14: “In those times many will oppose the king of the south."
Note: "This was Ptolemy V Epiphanes (ca. 203-181 b.c.)."

Verse 15: "Then the king of the north will advance and will build siege mounds and capture a well-fortified city."
Note: "This well-fortified city is apparently Sidon. Its capture from the Ptolemies by Antiochus the Great was a strategic victory for the Seleucid kingdom."

Verse 17: "...He will give the king of the south a daughter in marriage in order to destroy the kingdom..."
Note: "The daughter refers to Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus, who was given in marriage to Ptolemy V."

Verse 18: "But a commander will bring his shameful conduct to a halt..."
Note: "The commander is probably the Roman commander, Lucius Cornelius Scipio."

Verse 20: "There will arise after him [ie. after the King of the North] one who will send out an exactor of tribute to enhance the splendor of the kingdom..."
"The one who will send out an exactor of tribute was Seleucus IV Philopator (ca. 187-176 b.c.)."
"Perhaps this exactor of tribute was Heliodorus (cf. 2 Macc 3)."

Verse 21: "Then there will arise in his place a despicable person to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred."
Note: "This despicable person to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred is Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ca. 175-164 b.c.)."

Verse 25: "He will rouse his strength and enthusiasm against the king of the south with a large army."
Note: "This king of the south was Ptolemy Philometer (ca. 181-145 b.c.)."

Verse 30: "The ships of Kittim will come against him, leaving him disheartened."
The name Kittim has various designations in extra-biblical literature. It can refer to a location on the island of Cyprus, or more generally to the island itself, or it can be an inclusive term to refer to parts of the Mediterranean world that lay west of the Middle East (e.g., Rome). For ships of Kittim the Greek OT (LXX) has “Romans,” an interpretation followed by a few English versions (e.g., TEV). A number of times in the Dead Sea Scrolls the word is used in reference to the Romans. Other English versions are more generic: “[ships] of the western coastlands” (NIV, NLT); “from the west” (NCV, CEV).

This is apparently a reference to the Roman forces, led by Gaius Popilius Laenas, which confronted Antiochus when he came to Egypt and demanded that he withdraw or face the wrath of Rome. Antiochus wisely withdrew from Egypt, albeit in a state of bitter frustration.

Verse 32: "But the people who are loyal to their God will act valiantly."
Note: "This is an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which struggled to bring about Jewish independence in the second century b.c."

Verse 36: "Then the king will do as he pleases."
The identity of this king is problematic. If vv. 36-45 continue the description of Antiochus Epiphanes, the account must be viewed as erroneous, since the details do not match what is known of Antiochus’ latter days. Most modern scholars take this view, concluding that this section was written just shortly before the death of Antiochus and that the writer erred on several key points as he tried to predict what would follow the events of his own day. Conservative scholars, however, usually understand the reference to shift at this point to an eschatological figure, viz., the Antichrist. The chronological gap that this would presuppose to be in the narrative is not necessarily a problem, since by all accounts there are many chronological gaps throughout the chapter, as the historical figures intended by such expressions as “king of the north” and “king of the south” repeatedly shift.
Personally, since the paragraph starting with v. 36 just says "the king" will do certain thingd, whereas before and after that paragraph the text specifies the "king of the north" or the "king of the south," the theory that v. 36 refers to the Antichrist looks at first reasonable to me. But Dan. 11 nonetheless would be paired chiastically with Dan. 8 and thus reflect its themes.
The Orthodox Study Bible, which uses Theodotion's Version, gives the following identities to the rulers in Daniel 11:

Verse 2 Note: "Four kings indeed arose in Persia after Cyrus: Cambyses, Smerdis III, Darius IV, and Xerxes, who led the Persians against the Greeks in about 485-465 BC."
Verse 3, 4 Note: "After his death in 320 BC, the kingdom of Alexander the Great was divided among his four generals."

Verse 5: "Also the king of the south shall become strong; and one of his rulers shall prevail against him and have power over a great dominion under his authority."
Note: "Ptolemy I Soter was the king of the south, or Egypt. One of his rulers may refer to Ptolemy's son, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, or else Seleucus Nicator, another of Alexander's generals, who allied with Ptolemy I Soter and later gained power over him."

Verse 6: "After his years, they shall join forces, for the daughter of the king of the south shall go to the king of the north to make an agreement with him. But she shall not retain the power of her authority, and neither shall his seed stand; but she shall be betrayed along with those who brought her, the maiden and he who strengthened her in those times."
Note: "This verse prophesies Bernice, daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus. She could not retain her power when her father died, and was assassinated along with those that strengthened her. It was under Ptolemy II Philadelphus, king of Egypt from 287-247 BC, that the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was begun."

Verse 7: "But from the flower of her root, one shall arise in his readiness and shall come against the host, enter the strongholds of the king of the north, and deal with them and prevail.
Note: "Her root refers to Bernice's brother, Ptolemy III Evergetes. He avenged her by killing her assassin, Seleucus Callinicus, king of the north, after which he carried their Syrian gods back to Egypt."

Verse 10: "But his sons shall assemble a multitude of great forces. Thus when he comes, he shall come and overwhelm and pass by, then he shall rest. Again he shall contend to the extent of his strength."
Note: "The sons of Seleucus Callinicus of the north were Seleucus Ceranus and Antiochus III. They did indeed assemble... great forces, but it was Antiochus who passed through and invaded the south."

Verse 11-14:
Then the king of the south shall be angered and go out and fight with the king of the north, who shall muster a great multitude; but this multitude shall be given into his hand. For he will defeat the multitude, and his heart will be lifted up. Yes, he shall cast down tens of thousands, but will not prevail. For he will defeat the multitude, and his heart will be lifted up. Yes, he shall cast down tens of thousands, but will not prevail. For the king of the north will return and muster a multitude greater than the former, and at the end of some years his invading army shall come with a great force and much equipment. Now in those times many will rise up against the king of the south. Even the sons of troublemakers among your people shall exalt themselves in fulfillment of the vision, but they will be weak.
"Enraged, Ptolemy IV Philopater did fight with the king of the north in about 218 BC, but he did not gain supremacy. Antiochus III of Syria in the north, having mustered a greater army, did defeat the forces of his infant son, Ptolemy V Epiphanes, in 204 BC, with the help of troublemakers among the Jews."

Verse 16: "But he who comes against him shall do according to his will, and no one shall stand against him. He will stand in the Land of Beauty, and it shall be consumed by his hand."
Note: Antiochus III took Judea in battle with Scopus of the south. This included a siege of Scopus' garrison at Jerusalem.

Verse 17: "He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and he shall do whatever seems right to him. He shall give him the daughter of women to corrupt her; but she will not remain with him or be for him."
Note: "In an effort to ally himself with Egypt, Antiochus III married off his child daughter, Cleopatra, to seven-year-old Ptolemy V Epiphanes, but in the end, they did not remain with him."

Verse 18-19: "After this he shall turn his face to the islands and shall take many, and cause rulers to cease from their disgrace. Nevertheless, his own disgrace shall turn back on him. Then he will turn his face toward the strength of his land, but he shall stumble and fall, and will not be found.
Note: "Having assailed the coasts and islands of Asia Minor, and having later met with several defeats, Antiochus III could not be found. He disappeared and was not heard from again."

Verse 20: "Now a plant of the kingdom shall arise from his root and pass over in his readiness. He will further the glory of the kingdom, but in those days he shall be crushed, but not openly or in battle."
Note: "Antiochus' root most likely refers to one of his sons, Seleucus Philopator. He confiscated treasures from the temple in Jerusalem, but performed no great deeds and died without fighting a single battle."

Verses 21-24:
After this, one shall arise in his readiness, and be set at naught. Yet they did not give him the glory of the kingdom; nevertheless, he shall enter with prosperity and seize the kingdom by intrigue. Then the arms of him who overwhelms and the ruler of the covenant shall be overwhelmed and crushed by his presence. Then after the leagues made with him, he shall work deceit, for he shall come into the prosperous and wealthy places of the provinces and do what neither his fathers or forefathers have done. He will disperse plunder, spoils, and wealth among them and devise his plans against Egypt, but only for a time.
These verses prophesy Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-164 BC), another son of Antiochus III. The Fathers see in him a type of the antichrist who will arise at the end of the age. Antiochus overcame the Ptolemies by feigning clemency, that is, by intrigue. He reigned in Syria for eleven years after Seleucus, and he seized Judea as well. He defiled the temple in Jerusalem, thus provoking war with the Maccabees, who fought for Jewish self-rule. The ruler of the covenant (v. 22) prophesies Judas maccabeus. Antiochus was able to take over Egypt as well as Syria with only a small force of men, enabling him to do what neither his fathers or forefathers have done (v. 24).
The Orthodox Study Bible asserts that Dan. 11:34-35 relates to both Antiochus IV Epiphanes and to the Antichrist.
Verses 30-35 run:
30. For the Kitians shall go out and come against him, and he will be humbled. Then he will return and be enraged against the holy covenant.
31. Then offspring shall arise from him, and they shall defile the sanctuary of power. They shall take away the daily sacrifice, and place there the abomination of desolation.
32. Transgressors will bring about a covenant by deceitful means, but the people who know their God will be strong and do valiantly.
33. Those of the people who understand shall understand much, yet they shall be weakened by sword and flame, and by captivity and days of plundering.
34. When they are weak, they shall be aided with a little help; but many shall join with them by intrigue.
35. Some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them as by fire and to test them, so they may be revealed at the time of the end; because the matter is still for the appointed time.
vv. 30-35: The Romans came against Antiochus and made him leave Egypt in 168 BC. Enraged, he began his persecution of the Jews and his desecration of the temple. Help (v.34) came from the Maccabean revolt, led by Mattathias and Judas Maccabeus. Many early Christians also saw the destruction of the temple by the Roman general, Titus, in AD 70, as well as the persecutions of Christians by the Roman emperor Nero, as fulfillments of these verses. Indeed, Daniel's prophesies have been fulfilled many times over the course of history, as God's people have endured persecution and testing at the hands of those who blaspheme God in their pride.

Dan. 11:31- Dan. 12:13: This passage concerns the future time of the antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the end of the world.

I really had to parse Dan. 11 carefully at times to see which of the two kings, of the north and south, was meant by "he". Here is the KJV for vv. 11-13:
11. And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him [ie. the north king], even with the king of the north: and he [king of the north] shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude [of the north] shall be given into his [south king's] hand.
12. And when he [south king] hath taken away the multitude [of the north], his [south king] heart shall be lifted up; and he [south king] shall cast down many ten thousands: but he [south king] shall not be strengthened by it.
13. For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.
Dan. 11:17 looks tricky for the Hebrew, particularly regarding the term "upright ones."

וְיָשֵׂ֣ם ׀ פָּ֠נָיו לָבֹ֞וא בְּתֹ֧קֶף כָּל־מַלְכוּתֹ֛ו וִישָׁרִ֥ים עִמֹּ֖ו וְעָשָׂ֑ה וּבַ֤ת הַנָּשִׁים֙ יִתֶּן־לֹ֣ו לְהַשְׁחִיתָ֔הּ וְלֹ֥א תַעֲמֹ֖ד וְלֹא־לֹ֥ו תִהְיֶֽה׃

Interlinear Phonetic:
Wa Yashem - Panaw - Labow - Betoqep - kal - malkutow - wisharim - immow​
And he shall set - his face - to enter - with the strength - of whole - his kingdom - and upright ones - with him.​
Thus shall he do.

ubat hannashim yitten low lahashitah
and the daughter - of women - he shall give - him - to destroy it:

welo taamod welo low tihyeh.
but not - she shall stand - or - for him - be.​

The underlined Hebrew term "Wisharim" literally means "And ones/people who are יָשָׁר (yashr, meaning 'upright/straight/right/just')".
The page on Biblehub for "yashr" is here:
The exact phrase Wisharim shows up in just two other places in the Bible, and there it has the meaning of upright/just/right ones:
Proverbs 8:9 (They are all plain ones to him that understandeth and right ones to them that find knowledge)
Proverbs 29:10 (The bloodthirsty hate the blameless, but the upright seek his well-being.).

Dan. 11:17 in the KJV runs:
He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him;​
thus shall he do:​
and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her:​
but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.​

Dan. 11:17 in the NET version runs:
His intention* will be to come with the strength of his entire kingdom, and he will form alliances.
He will give the king of the south a daughter in marriage in order to destroy the kingdom,​
but it will not turn out to his advantage.​
NET Notes:
* “and he will set his face” (cf. vv. 18, 19).
** The present translation reads מֵישָׁרִים (mesharim, “alliances”) for the MT וִישָׁרִים (viysharim, “uprightness”).

So it appears that the NET version reads the phrase
wisharim - immow - Weashah (and upright ones - with him - Thus shall he do.) as:
mesharim - immow - Weashah (and alliances - with him - Thus shall he do.)
The idea would be that the northern king's intention will be to come with his entire kingdom's strength "and alliances" "with him" "thus shall he do", or in other words "and he (the northern king) will form alliances with him (the southern king)" like how the northern king married his daughter to the southern king.
I am not sure if this NET interpretation of the text really works grammatically in Hebrew because of how it uses the phrase Weashah (Thus shall he do). But I don't know Hebrew myself.
But not only is the grammar a potential weak spot in the NET translation - another spot is how the NET version interprets the "w" וִ as an "m" מֵ
These two Hebrew letters look quite different to me.

According to the DSS English Bible website, Daniel 11 in the DSS uses the same phrase, Wisharim ("and upright ones"), as in the Masoretic Hebrew text. According to the DSS English Bible site, Daniel 11's differences with the Masoretic text are the following underlined terms:
He will set his face understanding to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and with him equitable conditions.
He will perform them. He will give him the daughter of women men, to corrupt her him; but she will not stand, and won’t be for him.

So the differences between the DSS and Masoretic text don't really affect the interpretation of the term wisharim, which the DSS English Bible website interprets as "and equitable conditions." It seems that the website is taking the literal term "and just ones" to mean "and equitable conditions."

Based on the Blue Letter Bible site and the OSB, Verse 17's part about the upright ones says in Theodotion's version:
καὶ τάξει τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ εἰσελθεῖν ἐν ἰσχύι πάσης τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ​
He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom,​
καὶ εὐθεῖα πάντα μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ποιήσει​
and he shall do whatever seems right to him.​

The context seems to me to make possible the interpretation that in verse 17, the northern king was entering Judah or the southern king's land with strength and with "upright ones," particularly with his own daughter, since he gave her to the southern king in marriage and she showed her uprightness by her loyalty to her new husband, the southern king.

Here are verses 15-17 in the KJV to show what I mean about the context:
15. So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand.​
16. But he [the north king] that cometh against him [the south king] shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.​
17. He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.​
In verses 15-16, the north king is coming with his army into the southern king's territory and into Judah. Then in the end of verse 17, we can tell that the north king was also bringing his own daughter to marry the south king, and the text implies her uprightness since she stayed loyal to her new husband, the south king. So a reasonable interpretation is that in the first half of verse 17, the northern king was coming into the south king's land with his own kingdom's "strength" and with upright ones like his own daughter.
I looked for allusions to Daniel in the Maccabean books. 1 Macc. was written in c. 100 BC.

McClintock and Strong's Biblical Cyclopedia notes about Mattathias Maccabee's speech:
The speech which he is said to have addressed to his sons before his death is remarkable as containing the first distinct allusion to the contents of Daniel, a book which seems to have exercised the most powerful influence on the Maccabean conflict (1 Macc. 2:60; comp. Josephus, Ant. 12:6, 3).

In 2 Macc. 2, Mattathias says:
51. “Remember the deeds of the ancestors, which they did in their generations, and you will receive great honor and an everlasting name. ...
59. Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael believed and were saved from the flame.
60. Daniel, because of his innocence, was delivered from the mouth of the lions.
61. “And so observe, from generation to generation, that none of those who put their trust in him will lack strength.
Josephus relates Mattathias' speech in Antiq. 12:6.3, but without quoting the part about reverencing the ancestors like Daniel.

The Cyclopedia also relates the events in Daniel 11:29-45 to events in the Maccabean period, and especially 1 Macc. 1:28-64, 1 Macc. 2:46, 1 Macc. 7:6, 2 Macc. 5:27.
Nowhere is it more evident that facts are shadowed forth by the prophet only in their typical bearing on the development of God's kingdom. In this aspect the passage itself (Da 11:29-35) will supersede in a great measure the necessity of a detailed comment:

"At the time appointed [in the spring of B.C. 168] he [Antiochus Epiph.] shall return and come toward the south [Egypt]; but it shall not be as the first time, so also the last time [though his first attempts shall be successful, in the end he shall fail]. For the ships of Chittim [the Romans] shall come against him, and he shall be cast down, and return, and be very wroth against the holy covenant; and he shall do [his will]; yea, he shall return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant (compare Da 8:24-25). And forces from him [at his bidding] shall stand [remain in Judaea as garrisons; comp. 1 Maccabees 1:33, 34]; and they shall pollute the sanctuary, the stronghold, and shall take away the daily [sacrifice]; and they shall set up the abonination that maketh desolate [I Maccabees 1:45-47]. And such as do wickedly against (or rather such as condemn) the covenant shall be corrupt [to apostasy] by smooth words; but the people that know their God shall be strong and do [exploits]. And they that understand [know God and his law] among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword and by flame, by captivity and by spoil [some] days (1 Maccabees 1:60-64). Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help (1 Maccabees 1:28; 2 Maccabees 5:27; Judas Maccabees with nine others . . ); and maney shall cleave to them [the faithful followers of the law] with hypocrisy [dreading the prowess of Judas: 1 Maccabees 2:46, and yet ready to fall away at the first opportunity, 1 Maccabees 7:6]. And some of them of understanding shall fall, to make trial among them, and to purge and to snake them white, unto the time of the end; because [the end is] yet for a time appointed."

From this point the prophet describes in detail the godlessness of the great oppressor (ver. 36-39), and then his last fortunes and death (ver. 40-45), but says nothing of the triumph of the Maccabees or of the restoration of the Temple, which preceded the last event by some months. This omission is scarcely intelligible unless we regard the facts as symbolizing a higher struggle — a truth wrongly held by those who from early times referred ver. 36-45 only to Antichrist, the antitype of Antiochus-in which that recovery of the earthly temple had no place.

So the Cyclopedia sees Daniel 11's statement that "forces from him [the northern king] shall stand and they shall pollute the sanctuary, the stronghold..." as referring to 1 Macc. 1:33-34 about Antiochus garrisoning in Jerusalem.

1 Macc. 1 has:
33. Then they fortified the city of David with a great strong wall and strong towers, and it became their citadel.​
34. And they stationed there a sinful people, lawless men. These strengthened their position;​

Next, it takes Dan. 11's statement that the northern king's forces "shall pollute the sanctuary, the stronghold, and shall take away the daily [sacrifice]; and they shall set up the abonination that maketh desolate" as referring to 1 Maccabees 1:45-47, where Antiochus sent letters to Judah's cities
45. to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane sabbaths and feasts,
46. to defile the sanctuary and the priests,
47. to build altars and sacred precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice swine and unclean animals...

Then it takes the words in Dan. 11 that "they that understand [ie. acknowledge God with honor] among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword and by flame, by captivity and by spoil [some] days" to 1 Macc. 1's description of Antiochus' persecution of those obedient to the Torah:
60. According to the decree, they put to death the women who had their children circumcised,
61. and their families and those who circumcised them; and they hung the infants from their mothers’ necks.
62. But many in Israel stood firm and were resolved in their hearts not to eat unclean food.
63. They chose to die rather than to be defiled by food or to profane the holy covenant; and they did die.
64. And very great wrath came upon Israel.

It takes the words in Dan. 11 about the helping of those loyal to the covenant, "Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help", to refer to:
(A) Israel's mourning over Antiochus' persecutions in 1 Maccabees 1:28: "Even the land shook for its inhabitants, and all the house of Jacob was clothed with shame", and to
(B) 2 Maccabees 5:27. In Macc. 5, Antiochus slaughters Jews on the Sabbath, and 5:27 runs:
"But Judas Maccabe′us, with about nine others, got away to the wilderness, and kept himself and his companions alive in the mountains as wild animals do; they continued to live on what grew wild, so that they might not share in the defilement."

The Maccabees built a rebellion, so the Cyclopedia is taking the emerging rebellion to be the "little help" at that point.

The Cyclopedia takes the phrase, "and maney shall cleave to them [the faithful followers of the law] with hypocrisy" to refer to
(A) Jews accepting the Maccabees' domination out of fear, on the basis of 1 Macc 2:46's statement that Mattathias Maccabee and his friends "forcibly circumcised all the uncircumcised boys that they found within the borders of Israel." And:
(B) Alcimus' and others; accusation to Demetrius against Judas and his brothers in 1 Macc. 7:6:
5. Then there came to him [Demetrius] all the lawless and ungodly men of Israel; they were led by Al′cimus, who wanted to be high priest.
6. And they brought to the king this accusation against the people: “Judas and his brothers have destroyed all your friends, and have driven us out of our land.

In "The Good Angel That Delivered the Jews: How 2 Maccabees Adapted Daniel 7 and the Angel of the Lord Tradition," Phillip Muñoa asserted that
"Judas' vision in 2 Maccabees 15:13–16... appears to draw upon Daniel 7:9–14, using it as a prototype of divine empowerment for Judas' own authorization to defend Jerusalem."

However, 2 Macc. 15 doesn't openly refer to the book of Daniel or to angels. Rather, Munoa perceives similar motifs in the passages, with Dan. 7 describing the Ancient of Days and One like a Son of Man, along with divine judgment, and 2 Macc. 15 describes a vision of the elderly prophet Jeremiah giving a sword to Judas Maccabee as a gift from God to strike down his enemies.
Referring to some of the same references in McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia, Dr. W. A. Criswell writes:
Tracing the Book of Daniel through the centuries, we find references to it in I Maccabees. I Maccabees 1:54 refers to Daniel 9:27; 11:31; 12:11 in its reference to „the abomination of desolation,‟ as Jesus does in Matt. 24:15. Again, I Maccabees 2:49-70 comprises one of the most striking, solemn passages in the book, the record of the dying words of the venerable priest Mattathias to his sons, especially to Judas Maccabaeus. In this dying charge the noble patriot turns to the example of Daniel and his three faithful friends, to encourage his sons to be true to the God of their fathers. This is a tremendous witness to the early and authentic date of Daniel.
(Quoted in: Harold Willmington, "What You Need to Know About The Book of Daniel")
1 Macc. 1 includes:
54. Now on the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege on the altar of burnt offering. They also built altars in the surrounding towns of Judah
55. and offered incense at the doors of the houses and in the streets.
By comparison, it makes sense that this "desolating sacrilege" relates to the prediction in Daniel 11:31 about the followers of the "king of the north":
31. And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
The motif of the abomination of desolation shows up in Dan. 12:11:
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
In contrast, although Daniel 9:27 shares the sacrilegeous desolation motif, the chronology doesn't work for Dan. 9:27's prediction to match the sacrilege in Macc. 1:54. This is because the Maccabean era was in the early-mid 2nd century BC, whereas the counting of the "weeks" of years for Daniel 9's prediction requires that Dan. 9:27 would apply to a later time period.

The abomination shows up again in 1 Macc 6:7 in a messenger's report to Antiochus:
that they [the Maccabeans] had torn down the abomination that he [Antiochus] had erected on the altar in Jerusalem; and that they had surrounded the sanctuary with high walls as before, and also Beth-zur, his town.

Dr. Tony Garland's Daniel Discovered, Section 2.4 Date, goes into writings after the time of Daniel that reference Daniel, such as the Sibylline Oracles and book of Ecclesiasticus/Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach. (

Garland notes that
First Maccabees refers to Daniel by representing the events of Antiochus as being a fulfillment of Daniel’s predicted “abomination of desolation” (Dan. 12:11 cf. Dan. 11:31):

Now the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred forty and fifth year, they set up the abomination of desolation (Βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως [Bdelygma erēmōseōs]) upon the altar, and builded idol altars throughout the cities of Juda on every side; And burnt incense at the doors of their houses, and in the streets. (1 Mac. 1:54-55)​
Garland notes that, "Although written at a considerably later date and sharing in common with First Maccabees only the name 'Maccabees,' the Third Book of Maccabees (6:6-8) also makes reference to Daniel."

3 Maccabees was likely written in about the 1st century BC. 3 Macc. 6 has:
[6] The three companions in Babylon who had voluntarily surrendered their lives to the flames so as not to serve vain things, you rescued unharmed, even to a hair, moistening the fiery furnace with dew and turning the flame against all their enemies.
[7] Daniel, who through envious slanders was cast down into the ground to lions as food for wild beasts, you brought up to the light unharmed.

Garland writes that it's not not known for certain why the rabbis chose to categorize Daniel among the books of the Writings rather than among the Prophets. But he notes b. Meg. 3a, which says:
And Yonatan ben Uzziel also sought to reveal a translation of the Writings, but a Divine Voice emerged and said to him: It is enough for you that you translated the Prophets. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that he was denied permission to translate the Writings? Because it has in it a revelation of the end, when the Messiah will arrive. The end is foretold in a cryptic manner in the book of Daniel, and were the book of Daniel translated, the end would become manifestly revealed to all.
The Gemara introduces another statement from the same line of tradition. The verse states: “And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision; but a great trembling fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves” (Daniel 10:7). Who were these men? The term “men” in the Bible indicates important people; who were they? Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who said: These are the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.

The Gemara comments: In certain ways they, the prophets, were greater than him, Daniel, and in certain ways he, Daniel, was greater than them. They were greater than him, as they were prophets and he was not a prophet. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were sent to convey the word of God to the Jewish people, while Daniel was not sent to reveal his visions to others. In another way, however, he was greater than them, as he saw this vision, and they did not see this vision, indicating that his ability to perceive obscure and cryptic visions was greater than theirs.

The Gemara asks: Since they did not see the vision, what is the reason that they were frightened? The Gemara answers: Even though they did not see the vision, their guardian angels saw it, and therefore they sensed that there was something fearful there and they fled.
Garland also discusses evidence for the Book of Daniel in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the writings of Josephus, the Book of Baruch, the Book of Enoch, and the Sibylline Oracles.

Garland sees Daniel 7 as a key source for 1 Enoch 14:
Daniel 7: 9-10:
As I watched, thrones were set in place, and an Ancient One took his throne, his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, and its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued and flowed out from his presence. A thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood attending him. The court sat in judgement, and the books were opened.
1 Enoch 14:18-22:
And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of cherubim. And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look thereon. And the Great Glory sat thereon, and His raiment shone more brightly than the sun and was whiter than any snow. None of the angels could enter and could behold His face by reason of the magnificence and glory and no flesh could behold Him. (1 Enoch 14:18-22)

He notes that Otto Zöckler, in “The Book of the Prophet Daniel,” sees Book III of the Sibylline Oracles as taking from the Septuagint version of Daniel 7.

Martin Abegg, in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, notes other references to Daniel in the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Was the book of Daniel quoted or referred to in other writings at Qumran? Since Daniel was not written until about 165 BCE, it would be surprising to find it used in this way—yet that is precisely the case. 11QMelchizedek, for example, refers to the “Anointed of the Spirit, of whom Daniel spoke” (Dan. 9:25-26‣). The quotation of Daniel 12:10‣ as from the “book of Daniel the Prophet” in the Florilegium, referred to above, is significant for three reasons: (1) It proves that by about 25 BCE Daniel was already being quoted as Scripture. (2) It shows that the author(s) of the Florilegium knew Daniel as a complete book. They were not simply using traditions about Daniel that may have been circulating before the book was written. (3) It suggests that at Qumran Daniel was included among the Prophets and not among the Writings. . . Several other manuscripts—all written in Aramaic—also mention Daniel or events associated with his book. These are the Prayer of Nabonidus, two pseudo-Daniel documents, the Daniel Apocryphon (or Son of God text), 4QDaniel Sussana(?), 4QFour Kingdoms, and pap4QApocalypse.
In "From Israel’s Suffering (Isaiah’s Servant) to Atoning Human/Messianic Sacrifice (Daniel)" and "How Did Daniel Understand Isaiah’s Suffering Servant?", Neil Godfrey seems a common strain between the Suffering Servant's atonement in Isaiah 53, the theme of self-sacrifice in Daniel, and the theme of atonement in Maccabean literature.

Godfrey compares Isaiah 53:9-10
9. He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10. Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
with Daniel 12:2: "Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt."

Godfrey also notes Isaiah 53:10 (“through him [the Suffering Servant] the will of the Lord shall prosper”) and Isaiah 53:12 (NJPS), whereby the Servant will be “receiving the multitude as his spoil".

Turning to the concept of atonement in Daniel, Godfrey quotes Martin Hengel::
In the three men in the fiery furnace in Daniel 3, we encounter for the first time Jewish martyrs who “disobeyed the king’s command and yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God” (Dan. 3:28 Aramaic). [It is significant that the three young men do not die but are miraculously saved.] The accompanying Prayer of Azariah included in the Greek Additions to Daniel (between Dan. 3:23 and 3:24 MT) provides a theological comment . . . . (Hengel with Bailey, pp. 93-94)

Godfrey quotes a Deuterocanonical section of Daniel 3, the Prayer of Azariah, as praying:
"Such may our sacrifice be in your sight today [sc. like burnt offerings of rams, etc.], and may we unreservedly follow you, for no shame will come to those who trust in you. (Pr. Azar. 3:17, NRSV)"

Godfrey notes that
an older Septuagint manuscript of the prayer (Papyrus 967) has a different middle line:
"So let our sacrifice be in your sight today [sc. like burnt offerings of rams, etc.), and may it make atonement before [lit., behind] you, for there is no shame to those who trust in you, and may it be perfect before [lit., behind] you."
Godfrey considers 2 Maccabees 7:37-38 a case of "martyrs’ deaths being cautiously associated with sacrificial atonement". The passage runs:
"I, like my brothers, give up body and life for the laws of our ancestors, appealing to God to show mercy soon to our nation … and through me and my brothers to bring to an end the wrath of the Almighty that has justly fallen on our whole nation."

In "Good question....Was Daniel written AFTER the events he foretold?", Glenn Miller lists Pseudepigrapha that may mention or allude to Daniel, including 1 Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, the Apocalypse of Zephaniah, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Letter of Aristeas, Ezekiel the Tragedian (2nd c. BC), Ecclesiasticus, 1 Baruch, and 1-2 Maccabees.

Miller notes: "I Maccabees was written somewhere in 134-104 BCE [Harrington, HCSB; Kee, CASA]. This is later than [the Maccabeans' opening period] by some 40-70 years, but is witness to how well-known the stories of Daniel 2 were".

Miller sees Daniel 12.2 ("Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.") as a basis for 2 Macc. 7:9,14,23. Dan. 7:14 relates the declaration of one Jewish martyr as follows:
When he was near death, he said, “One cannot but choose to die at the hands of mortals and to cherish the hope God gives of being raised again by him. But for you there will be no resurrection to life!”

In "How early Judaism read Daniel 9:24-27", Dean R. Ulrich sees how the theme of the 77 years of Dan. 9 shows up in some other ancient writings:
The prophecy of the seventy sevens in Dan 9:24-27 has produced a variety of interpretations throughout the history of Christian interpretation. This article examines early Jewish readings of Daniel in order to determine if Jewish interpretation of the seventy sevens was more uniform or just as diverse. After considering the Septuagint, 1 and 2 Maccabees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus, 1 Enoch, and Jubilees, the article concludes that a typological hermeneutic enabled Jews to apply Daniel's prophecy in fresh ways to new situations. The theme of jubilee with the accompanying hope of inheritance especially caused Jews to read this passage creatively during times of loss and stress.
The translation for the end of Daniel 12:7, as underlined below, looks tricky. Dan. 12 begins with the prediction of an angelic man, apparently God, who is above a river. He predicts a time of extreme distress and also resurrection. Two men are standing by a river, one on each side of it. In v. 6 (NET version), "One said to the man clothed in linen who was above the waters of the river, 'When will the end of these wondrous events occur?'" In verse 7, the angelic man over the river replies:

The Hebrew for the angel's declaration runs:
כִּי֩ לְמֹועֵ֨ד מֹֽועֲדִ֜ים וָחֵ֗צִי
ki l'mowed mowadim wahetsi
That for a time - times - and half [a time]

וּכְכַלֹּ֛ות נַפֵּ֥ץ יַד־עַם־קֹ֖דֶשׁ
u-kekalowt nappes yad 'am qodesh
And-when-has-been-completely shattered power of people holy

תִּכְלֶ֥ינָה כָל־אֵֽלֶּה׃
tiklenah kal elleh.
shall be finished all these [things].
The KJV says for this part of Dan. 7:
"...that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."

The NET version runs:
“It is for a time, times, and half a time. Then, when the power of the one who shatters the holy people has been exhausted, all these things will be finished.”

Translator's Comment:
The present translation reads יַד־נֹפֵץ (yad nofets, “hand of one who shatters”) rather than the MT נַפֵּץ־יַד (nappets yad, “to shatter the hand”).
The NET version seems less likely than the KJV, because the NET version relies on the phrase, "has been exhausted," which doesn't show up in the Hebrew.

Below are versions of Theodotion's LXX:
Swete's (Bible Hub)
ὅτι εἰς καιρὸν καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἥμισυ καιροῦ:
ἡ συντέλεια χειρῶν ἀφέσεως λαοῦ ἁγίου, καὶ συντελεσθήσεται πάντα ταῦτα.

Brenton's 1851 (
ὅτι εἰς καιρὸν καιρῶν καὶ ἥμισυ καιροῦ
ἐν τῷ συντελεσθῆναι διασκορπισμὸν χειρὸς λαοῦ ἡγιασμένου γνώσονται πάντα ταῦτα with Strong's Concordance interlinear:
ότι εις καιρόνa και καιρούς και ήμισυ καιρούa,
that for time and times and half time,
εν τω συντελεσθήναι διασκορπισμόν χειρός λαού ηγιασμένου
in the completing dispersing hand of-people having been sanctified
γνώσονται πάντα ταύτα
they shall know all these things.

Orthodox Study Bible:
...that it would be for a time, times, and half a time.
Thus when the dispersion is ended, they shall know all these things.

The Apocalypse of Zephaniah is an apocryphal Jewish text from the 1st century BC to 1st century AD that refers to Daniel's story and uses phrases in the Book of Daniel. The prophet Zephaniah lived during the reign of King Josiah of Judah in the 7th century BC. In the passages below, I am underlining references that overlap with the Book of Daniel. In Chapter 4 of this Apocalypse, Zephaniah writes:
1. Then I walked with the angel of the Lord. I looked before me and I saw a place there.
2. Thousands of thousands and myriads of myriads of angels entered through it.
In Chapter 6, Zephaniah says,
4. Then I thought that the Lord Almighty had come to visit me.
5. Then when I saw, I fell upon my face before him in order that I might worship him.
6. I was very much afraid, and I entreated him that he might save me from this distress.
7. I cried out, saying, “Eloe, Lord, Adonai, Sabaoth. I beseech Thee to save me from this distress because it hath befallen me.”
8. In that same instant I stood up, and I saw a great angel before me. His hair was spread out like that of lionesses’. His teeth were outside his mouth like a bear. His hair was spread out like women’s. His body was like the serpent’s when he wished to swallow me.
9. And when I saw him, I was afraid of him so that all the parts of my body were loosened and I fell upon my face.
10. I was unable to stand,
and I prayed before the Lord Almighty, “Thou wilt save me from this distress. Thou art the one who saved Israel from the hand of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt. Thou saved Susanna from the hand of the elders of injustice. Thou saved the three holy men, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, from the furnace of burning fire. I beg you to save me from this distress.”
11. Then I arose and stood, and I saw a great angel standing before me with his face shining like the rays of the sun in its glory since his face is like that which is perfected in its glory.
12. And he was girded as if a golden girdle were upon his breast. His feet were like bronze which is melted in a fire.
13. And when I saw him, I rejoiced, for I thought that the Lord Almighty had come to visit me.
14. I fell upon my face, and I worshiped him.
15. He said to me, “Take heed. Worship me not. I am not the Lord Almighty, but am the great angel, Eremiel, who is over the abyss and Hades, the one in which all of the souls are imprisoned from the end of the Flood, which came upon the earth, until this day.”
16. Then I inquired of the angel, “What is the place to which I have come?” He said to me, “It is Hades.”
17. Then I asked him, “Who is the great angel who stands thus, whom I saw?” He said, “This is the one who accuses men in the presence of the Lord.”
Later, in Chapter 8, Zephaniah is helped onto a boat, which James Charlesworth theorizes is aimed at taking Zephaniah from the distressing realm. Then Zephaniah says that, "Thousands of thousands and myriads of myriads of angels gave praise before me."

The references to the thousands and myriads of angels resemble the one in Dan. 7.10. In the Book of Daniel, Daniel falls down on different occasions before an angel. Among those experiences, Daniel has a vision of a ram and goat battling, and then says in Daniel 8,
27. And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business...
Then in Daniel 10, he has a vision of a divine angel. Describing his experience, he says that,
8. ...there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength.
9. Yet heard I the voice of his words: and when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground.
Zephaniah's vision of the lioness-like and toothed bear-like accusing angel resembles the image of the hostile beasts in Daniel 7, where there is a lion and a bear that had "three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it". Zephaniah's description of Eremiel as having a golden girdle and bronze feet resembles the description of the angelic man with a golden girdle and feet of brass in Dan. 10:5-6.