Since the end of the 19th century at least 16 different primary influences on the vision of Daniel 7:2-14 have been proposed, thereby demonstrating the complexity of its traditio-historical background. However, most traditio-historical reviews on the vision of Daniel 7 barely outline the parameters of the debate and usually concentrate either on the first (v. 2-8) or the second part (v. 9-14). The research history in this volume discusses in detail the various proposed influences on the whole vision. However, instead of presenting bare summaries of the different positions, footnotes will often contain substantive quotations of the original publications. They elucidate underlying concepts more accurately and function as windows into a sometimes heated ideological struggle. In addition, the reader is aided in forming his or her own judgement by means of critical scholarly remarks on the various proposals. The present study also provides an example for examining the mechanics of the traditio-historical method, as well as the difficulty of establishing a uniform measure for determining what constitutes a parallel.