The book of Daniel contains manuscrips from a long range of time. A later editor must have bundled these manuscripts. Therefore you should differentiate the date of origin between the different original manuscripts and the later editor.

I found there is a shift of the king's title visible in the book of Daniel which ocurred between Darius I and Xerxes (https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/37656/27923).

The notes of Frank Luke appeal to me as for the original manuscripts, but are they also true for the connecting texts?

The book of Daniel contains manuscrips from a long range of time. A later editor must have bundled these manuscripts. Therefore you should differentiate the date of origin between the different original manuscripts and the later editor.

I found there is a shift of the king's title visible in the book of Daniel which occurred between Darius I and Xerxes (https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/37656/27923).

The notes of Frank Luke appeal to me as for the original manuscripts, but are they also true for the connecting texts?

The book of Daniel contains manuscrips from a long range of time. A later editor must have bundled these manuscripts. Therefore you should differentiate the date of origin between the different original manuscripts and the later editor.

The notes of Frank Luke appeal to me as for the original manuscripts, but are they also true for the connecting texts?

The book of Daniel contains manuscrips from a long range of time. A later editor must have bundled these manuscripts. Therefore you should differentiate the date of origin between the different original manuscripts and the later editor.

I found there is a shift of the king's title visible in the book of Daniel which ocurred between Darius I and Xerxes (https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/37656/27923).

The notes of Frank Luke appeal to me as for the original manuscripts, but are they also true for the connecting texts?