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

Work	Passage	Greek textual indicators of Ammonian-style pericope / unit use	Strength as witness for Ammonius-style unit thinking
Origen, Commentary on Matthew	16.16	Origen raises an explicit sequence problem: «πῶς ὁ λόγος τῶν ἑξῆς ἀκόλουθος ἔσται τοῖς ἀποδεδομένοις», asking how what follows fits after what has already been given. He proposes resolving it by examining either «τῶν κατὰ τὸν Ματθαῖον δύο» or «τοῦ κατὰ τὸν Μᾶρκον πώλου», treating Matthew’s and Mark’s formulations as alternative witnesses to the same bounded narrative unit. He then aligns the parallel command formulas across Matthew, Mark, and Luke («ὁ κύριος … χρείαν ἔχει») side-by-side, presupposing a stable pericope shared across gospels. The concern with continuation after a unit (post-pericope sequence) further implies delimited sections rather than continuous single-gospel reading.	Strong (8/10) — clear evidence of pericope-level synoptic coordination and sequence management consistent with Ammonian-style sectioning.