The Theories of the Enthymeme Between Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (325-880 Ca.)

The theory of the enthymeme is already ambiguous in classical Greek and Latin texts. This logical-rhetorical component is described as a sort of ‘imperfect syllogism’; as the demonstration of a contradiction (and therefore as argumentation a contrario or ex repugnantibus); or as ‘mental consideration’ (mentis conceptio). This confusion is passed on to the Latin Early Middle Ages mainly through the works of Cicero and the Rhetorica ad Herennium, but also through the so-called rhetores latini minores, which operate in Late Antiquity (in particular, the enthymeme is discussed by Fortunatianus, Iulius Rufinianus and Iulius Victor). Between the VI and IX centuries, the leading philosophers and theologians accept all three ancient interpretations. Boethius, for example, sees the enthymeme as rhetorical syllogism which makes a clear distinction between logic and rhetoric, while John Scottus Eriugena, for his part, considers it as equivalent of the third type of hypothetical syllogism, and uses it, in particular, in the theological argumentations of his De praedestinatione.