I have not been directly involved with the fragment that had been touted some years ago (and since) as part of the Gospel of Mark that purportedly dated from the first century. Its publication has been announced, and it is dated to the second to third century. Here in this post I’ll try to briefly summarize, highlight, and/or link to some of the most important blog posts and other sources of information with relevant details, for those interested in finding out more.
Let me start with this helpful summary from the Egypt Exploration Society:
P.Oxy LXXXIII 5345
In the latest volume of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, volume LXXXIII text 5345, Professor Obbink and Dr Colomo publish a fragment from a papyrus codex (book). The two sides of the papyrus each preserve brief traces of a passage, both of which come from the gospel of Mark. After rigorous comparison with other objectively dated texts, the hand of this papyrus is now assigned to the late second to early third century AD. This is the same text that Professor Obbink showed to some visitors to Oxford in 2011/12, which some of them reported in talks and on social media as possibly dating to the late first century AD on the basis of a provisional dating when the text was catalogued many years ago. Papyrus 5345 was excavated by Grenfell and Hunt, probably in 1903 (on the basis of its inventory number), and has never been for sale, whatever claims may have been made arising from individual conversations in the past. No other unpublished fragments of New Testament texts in the EES collection have been identified as earlier than the third century AD.
Jesse Stone in Medium and Candida Moss and Joel Baden in The Daily Beast sought to inform a general audience about these matters.
Brent Nongbri wrote numerous blog posts on the subject and also other papyri from Oxyrhynchus:
So-called “First Century Mark.” Wow. (with a coda on Oxyrhynchus inventory numbers)
Egypt Exploration Society on the Papyrus Formerly Known As “First Century” Mark
A Picture and Still More Inventory Numbers
P.Oxy. 31.2604: Writing Exercises and Palaeography
Some Observations on the “Provisional Dating” of P.Oxy. 83.5345
EES Makes Edition of the New Oxyrhynchus Mark Fragment Available Online
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri of Dubious Provenance and Editorial Choice
A Bit More on the Storage and Inventory of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri
Bart Ehrman wrote several blog posts (as you will recall, it was in a debate with Ehrman that the claim of a first century copy of part of Mark was first made publicly by Daniel Wallace):
https://ehrmanblog.org/we-do-not-have-a-first-century-copy-of-the-gospel-of-mark/
https://ehrmanblog.org/what-the-new-fragment-of-marks-gospel-looks-like-the-so-called-first-century-mark/
https://ehrmanblog.org/non-disclosure-agreements/
Brice Jones also blogged about this topic.
Evangelical Textual Criticism had several posts including on the publication announcement, Dan Wallace’s response, and an article about it in Christianity Today.
From Larry Hurtado:
What Yet Lies Beneath? The Hoard of Unpublished Oxyrhynchus Texts
https://www.episcopalcafe.com/earliest-gospel-of-mark-manuscript-fragment-discovered/
Is There a First-Century Fragment of Mark’s Gospel? Apparently Not
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In