In any case, Daniel 8:2 doesn’t provide the sort of clue that Hays claims.
His second clue is that Daniel “skips Nabonidus, who is known to have succeeded Nebuchadnezzar.
But now at last it had become suddenly broken up, and the earth seemed to reel beneath men’s feet.
Under Vespasian, however, the old stability seemed to return : it lasted on practically for above a century more.
Nothing at all corresponding to the tumultuous days after Nero is known in Domitian’s reign, or the time which followed it.
Domitian’s proscriptions of Roman nobles, and Koman philosophers, and Roman Christians, were not connected with any general upheaval of society.
What is told of banishment by Domitian would suit the case of St John only if he was banished from Rome, a possibility certainly not to be discarded, considering some of the legends, when our knowledge is so small; but still only one alternative” (xxiv). Nero affected the imagination of the world as Domitian, as far as we know, never did” (xxvi).
If Belshazzar wanted to send a seasoned representative to Elam’s capital of Susa, it would be hard for him to find a better representative than Daniel.
Alternatively: Daniel 5 suggests that Belshazzar had little use for Daniel, so perhaps the king had been deployed him to diplomatic backwaters.
Hays also points to the stylized periodization of empires in Daniel 7 as evidence: “Such ‘periodization’ of history was a common feature of Greco-Roman historiography, which further suggests that the Daniel traditions come from a later period.” Again, the claim rests on a historical error: Periodization—including the use of metals to identify different ages—didn’t begin with the Greeks, but had more ancient, including Babylonian, precedents (cf. That was, after all, great crisis of Israel’s post-exilic period.
Why wouldn’t God give His people prior warning of the coming trauma?
That’s not evidence of ignorance; it’s an indication of genre. Given how little we know about literary influence in the ancient world, and about the nature of literary influence in general, it’s precarious to date an ancient text on this basis. Thus, the appearance of the ‘little horn’ is one clue that this passage in Dan 7 appears to have been written at a late date.”.