From time to time some scholars come forth, trying to argue for a minority position on various questions related to, e.g., authorship, date etc of the New Testament writings. Some times research is making progress in this way too.
I myself have argued for the minority position that Silvanus was both the secretary and the carrier of the First letter of Peter.
Last spring I came over a book, published in 2009, trying to argue for Mark as a contributive amanuensis of 1 Peter. That view too is a minority position, but also one that deserves a hearing:
Jongyoon Moon, Mark as a Contributive Amanuensis of 1 Peter ( LIT Verlag, Berlin, 2009).
The authors lays out his program thus: The thesis of this study is that Mark was the contributive amanuensis for first Peter with Peter allowing a freer hand in the composition. The study investigates the relationship between first Peter and Mark from five angles by means of a historical and comparative approach. First, the study surveys the major proposals regarding the authorship of first Peter. Second, first century letter writing is studied as a practical ans supportive background to this inquiry. Third, the process of Paul’s letter writing is examined in light of first century letterwriting for the practice of using an amanuensis and Peter’s employment of an amanuensis. Fourth, the close relationship between Peter and Mark through their ministry based on First Peter 5:13 and the references to Mark in the early church, including Papias’ note reported by Eusebius, will be explored as evidence of a historical connection between two individuals. Fifth, the syntactic correlation, the distinctive features of terminology, and the significant and frequent use of hws for a simile between First Peter and Mark’s gospel is investigated as possible evidence that implies linguistic connections between them. Finally, the common Old Testament quotations (allusions) in First Peter and the gospel of Mark, specifically, the quotation of Ps 118:22 in both Mark 12:10 and First Peter 2:7,the quotation of 8allusion to) the suffering Servant of Isa 53 in First Peter 2:22-25a and Mark 10:45b, the quotation of (allusion to) to Ezek 34 in Mark 6:34 and 1 Pet 2:25b, and the quotation of (allusion to) Isa 40:8 in 1 Pet 1:25 and Mark 13:31b, and they their conflated and integrated use of the Old Testament is studied as possible evidence for surprising literary connections between them. The study is concluded with a summary and relevant conclusions.