Against the reduction of modality to essence.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a claim of metaphysical modality, in possession of good alethic standing, must be in want of an essentialist foundation. Or at least so say the advocates of the view (the REF, for short), according to which all (metaphysical) modality is to be reductively defined in terms of essence. Here, I contest this bit of current wisdom. In particular, I offer two puzzles-one concerning the essences of non-compossible, complementary entities, and a second involving entities whose essences are modally 'loaded'-that together strongly call into question the possibility of reducing modality to essence.