Several aspects of the correspondence strongly suggest that the author of Daniel was aware of the Enuma Elish:
        (1) in both there is a connection between the four winds of heaven and the stirring up of the sea or waves;
        (2) a number of monstrous animals result from the sea or Tiamat having been disturbed;
        (3) Qingu, like the fourth beast in Daniel, is not characterised by the name of a known creature, whereas the earlier ones are in both the Enuma Elish and Daniel;
        (4) the survival of all the beasts, bar one, occurs in both Daniel and the Enuma Elish;
        (5) in both texts the last beast of chaos is the most terrible;
        (6) the last beast is killed by fire in Daniel and such a tradition was present in the Babylonian New Year Festival;
        (7) everlasting dominion is given to One like a Son of Man in Daniel and to Marduk in the Enuma Elish.

        In addition there are some correspondences in vocabulary between Daniel and the Enuma Elish, although, with the exception of the word for ‘four’ (a common semitic word) these are not on an etymological level ³⁴. In key places where similar statements are made in the Enuma Elish and Dan 7 the Akkadian does not have an Aramaic correspondent deriving from the same root. Rather, the author of Daniel has had to use an Aramaic word with the same meaning but deriving from a different root. Correspondences that were discovered are as follows:
        (1) ‘the four winds’ (Dan 7,2 cf. Ee I 105,108);
        (2) the causative form of the respective verbs is used for the disturbance of the sea (Dan 7,2; cf. Ee I 105,108);
        (3) ‘fire’ issues from both the Ancient of Days and Marduk (Dan 7,10 cf. Ee IV 40);
        (4) ‘He came to the Ancient of Days and they caused him to approach before him’ (Dan 7,13); cf. ‘Draw near, approach Anshar’ (Ee II 134) and ‘He drew near and waited upon Anshar’ (Ee II 137).