Scholarship of the book of Daniel tends to emphasize either the unity or disunity of the book based on authorship, discourse, genre, language, and historicity; yet in the ongoing discussion about the unity of the book of Daniel one feature of the text has been largely neglected. This feature is the “Danielic self.” Daniel is presented in Dan 1-6 as a powerful and influential figure who accomplishes incredible interpretive tasks, but in Dan 7-12 he is portrayed as weak and incapable of discerning anything without help. While this dissonance could be explained by the disunity of the book, in light of additional unifying features this paper will demonstrate the opposite. It will be shown from diachronic and synchronic positions that the book of Daniel actually presents a single Danielic self from complementary public and private perspectives.