This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Drsmoothdrums (talk | contribs) at 01:28, 22 July 2004 (created!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:28, 22 July 2004 by Drsmoothdrums (talk | contribs) (created!)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Acquired by Bernard Greenfell in Egypt in 1920, this small parchment is generally accepted to be the earliest extant copy of New Testament canonical writing. The front (recto) contains lines from the Gospel of John 18:31-33, and the back (verso) contains lines from verses 37-38.
The original translation of the work was not done until 1934 by C. H. Roberts, who published the essay “An Unpublished Fragment of the Fourth Gospel in the John Rylands Library” in the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library XX, 1936, pp 45-55.
Although P52 is generally accepted as the earliest extant canonical record (see 7Q5 for an alternate candidate), the dating of the parchment is by no means the subject of consensus among critical scholars. The style of the script is strongly Hadrian, which would suggest a date somewhere between 125 and 160 CE. The difficulty of fixing the date of a fragment based solely on paleographic evidence allows for a range of dates that extends well into the second half of the 2nd Century.
The significance of P52 rests on both its early date, and it’s geographic dispersal from the site of authorship. As the fragment is removed from the autograph by at least one step of transmission, the date of authorship for the Gospel of John must be as least a few years prior to the dating of P52. The location of the fragment in Egypt extends that time even further, allowing for the dispersal of the documents from the point of authorship and transmission to the point of discovery.
Unfortunately, P52 is not a valuable attestation to the form of John's Gospel extant at the tiem of the writing of the parchment. The fragment contains so few lines, that it is not useful for comparison to later documents containing a more complete record of the work.