@EP
Yes, the story of John the Baptist is a familiar one. But what I wanted to emphasize is that he has acquired an extraordinary ability to see the symbols in the Law that are - as it were - "behind" the text. He saw the Spirit and not the letter of the Law. And I find something similar missing in the interpretations of Daniel. The interpretation of the first half of chapter 11 - as you accurately describe - is then based on historical sources like Josephus Flavius or the Maccabees and other extra-biblical literature. We can then say that the first half of Daniel 11 is interpreted by Josephus and not by the Bible.
This - in my opinion - needs to be changed. I've lived to see that for about 1700 years, a certain Hyppolitus of Rome and variants on his interpretation sufficed as a commentator on Daniel for Christians, but I don't want to live to see that for another 1700 years, it stays that way. It's time for a change! βοΈππ
On a more serious note: as you write I see it complicated => I'm trying to figure out the state of affairs and it's not good. The interpretation of Daniel will be and is easy if Jesus would give you a hint. I struggle to hear how He would say: Have you not read there and there and this and that.... But so far I know of no one who has been given that honor. Not even the false prophets who would know there or elsewhere and for us to go there are none or even few. No one wants to be a false prophet today either, humanity has become lazy...ππ