Origen's Use of Ammonius in Commentary on Matthew [Part Twenty Eight]

Work	Passage	Greek textual indicators of Ammonian-style pericope / unit use	Strength as witness for Ammonius-style unit thinking
Origen, Commentary on Matthew	16.12	Origen frames the issue as a synoptic comparison problem (not a “Matthew-only” exegesis): Mark and Luke sometimes “set out the same history” vs “a different but similar one” (κατὰ τινὰς μὲν τὴν αὐτὴν ἱστορίαν… κατὰ δὲ τινὰς ἑτέραν παραπλησίαν). He then explicitly says it is “worth seeing their material too” (ἄξιόν γε καὶ τὰ τούτων ἰδεῖν), and proceeds by taking Mark’s Jericho unit as a bounded pericope: he quotes Mark with incipit + explicit range marker: «καὶ ἔρχεται εἰς Ἱεριχώ…» … «καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς, ἕως τοῦ…». He describes Mark’s account as “the things at the place” (τὰ κατὰ τὸν τόπον), i.e., the narrative locus as a unit. He then offers two “modes” of handling divergences that presuppose prior pericope-alignment: (1) a “bare history” harmonizer who refuses evangelists to “disagree” (μὴ βουλόμενος διαφωνεῖν) posits multiple similar events/visits (τινὶ μὲν ἐπιδημίᾳ… ἑτέρᾳ δὲ… ἄλλῃ…), effectively treating the synoptic parallels as separate occurrences; (2) the “deeper narration” reader says it is one and the same thing in different diction (ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πρᾶγμα διαφόροις λέξεσι), and then maps “two blind” vs “one blind” onto an interpretive grid (δύο… Ἰσραὴλ καὶ Ἰούδας / εἷς… ὁ ὅλος… λαός). Finally, he keeps working inside the same Markan unit by mining its distinctive detail (the naming of Τίμαιος / Βαρτιμαῖος) as a feature of the pericope to be interpreted “according to the place” (βαθύτερον κατὰ τὸν τόπον).	Strong (8/10) — the incipit/“ἕως” bounding plus the explicit “same vs similar history” synoptic framework and the locus-language (κατὰ τὸν τόπον) show Origen operating pericope-by-pericope with cross-gospel control, exactly the kind of mental apparatus an Ammonian system formalizes.