The structure of the account requires another new paragraph at this point. This makes the previous paragraph consist of only one verse, but translators should not be worried about this.

Then I Daniel looked: on the use of I Daniel, see comments on 7.15; 8.15, 27. The verb here should not be translated in such a way as to give the impression that Daniel looked for the first time. Rather, as he kept on looking he “saw” or “noticed (two men).”

Behold: see comments on the Aramaic equivalent at 2.31, and on the Hebrew in 8.3.

Two others: if the translator’s language requires that the nature of the two others be clearly stated, then it will probably be best to say “two other angels” (see Anchor Bible), since this is the clear meaning in the context. Some translations, however, have “people” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “men” (Good News Translation). If there exists a more neutral term, like “beings,” this will also be appropriate. But if the translator is forced to say something more, the word “angels” is probably best.

The long and awkward description of the location of the other two angels at the end of this verse may be rendered much more naturally in many languages as “on opposite sides of the water” or “one on each bank” (Good News Translation).

The stream: this does not represent the same word as translated “canal” or “river” in chapter 8, and so it very likely does not refer to the Ulai. Nor is it the same word as the great river in 10.4. However, the use of the definite article makes readers think that it refers to something already mentioned. It may be, however, that it does refer back to chapter 10. But since this is a vision, the precise river referred to is unimportant. It may therefore be legitimately translated “a river,” as in Good News Translation.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .