Heresiography in Context: Hippolytus' Elenchos as a Source for Greek Philosophy (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 487 without offering any additional support for it. How could he do this? I have argued that this question can be answered if one takes the relevant sameness reladon to allow an individual substance to be the same as its universal essence and if one accepts a diagnosis of the fallacy of accident that recognizes something like referential opacity. No comparable answer can be given if one accepts an identity interpretation of this relation and adopts Lewis's diagnosis of the fallacy of accident,s In spite of any such questions, this is a valuable book. It belongs on the reading list of anyone interested in Aristode on substance, predication, change, the fallacy of accident, and intensional contexts. NORMAN O. DAHL UniversityofMinnesota, Minneapolis-St. Paul Jaap Mansfeld. Heresiographyin Context:Hippolytus'Elenchosas a Sourcefor GreekPhilosophy . Philosophia Antiqua, 56. Leiden-New York-K61n: E.J. Brill, :992. Pp. xvii + 39 L NP. This voluminous book is a thorough, in-depth inquiry into the sources of Hippolytus' important reports about the Greek philosophers as presented in his masterpiece Refutatio omnium haeresium (composed in Rome between A.n. 2U9 and ~35)" The book consists of ten chapters (1-316), one Excursus ("On Substance, Being and Division in Middle Platonist and Later Aristotelian Contexts," 78-1o9), two appendices ("Some Literature on Hippolytus, His Sources and His Methods," 317-95, and Diaeresis,3u631 ), a generous bibliography (33~-57), and an Index locorumpotiorum (359-91). The author has succeeded in considerably improving our knowledge of both Hippolytus' philosophical centoand the Middle Platonist, Late Aristotelian, and notably Pythagoreanizing traditions in Pre-Neoplatonism on which Hippolytus depends. His command of Greek sources is admirable, his judgment is sound and reliable. Mansfeld is convincing in correcting the pioneering work of Diels (Doxographi sIn "On Substance Being the Same as Its Essence in MetaphysicsZ.6: The Pale Man Argument ," unpublished, I argue that it followsfrom this weaker sense of sameness and an intensional diagnosis of the fallacy of accident that a pale man is not the same as his essence, without also leaving Aristotle with a more direct argument for this conclusion. However, this conclusionwill not follow given Lewis's diagnosis of the fallacy of accident. And even though it willfollow if one accepts the identity interpretation and an intensional diagnosis of the fallacy behind the argument , this sdll leaves Aristotle with a more direct argument for this conclusion. An intensionaldiagnosis of the fallacy behind this argumentrecieves some confirmationfrom Aristotle's reaffirmation of its conclusionat Io31b97-28, where, as Lewishimselfrecognizes (1o1 n. '7), Aristotle talks about a pale man, not as an accidental compound, but as a man who happens to be pale. The second argument in Z.6, the argument at to3la~8-bx4 that takes Forms as its examples of substances, also poses problems for the identity interpretation. Among them is explainingthe connectiondrawn at lo31b3ff, between the denial that Forms are the same as their essences and the "detachment" of Forms and their essences. Not even the possibility of their detachment follows from the denial that a Form is identical with its essence. 488 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 32:3 JULY 199 4 Graeci [Berlin, 1879: 144-56]) while distinguishing in Refutatio, Book I (the Philosophoumena ) between the bulk of doxographic sources arranged by succession (most of Ref. 1. l--R6; compare Aetius 1.3), a different Neopythagorean source 0-2-4: Pythagoras, Empedocles, Heraclitus), and finally a Proto-Skeptic source (IA4: Metrodorus and Xenophanes): see his Table on p. 43- The matter is, however, far from settled. At least the chapters 1.24-26 (the Brahmans, Druids, and Hesiod) may well derive from a Hellenistic textbook or anthology. Mansfeld himself attests to the limits of our knowledge when (on 6 f.) he distinguishes no less than six caesurae: 1.1 # 2-4//6-9 H 11-15 # 16ff 18ff. Chapters 5 and 6 (57-133), devoted to the Middle Platonist division of substance attributed by Hippolytus to Aristotle (Ref. 7.15ff.), is in my opinion the most original part of the book. However, here too many questions are left unanswered (for example, the sources of Basilides' Nonexisting God and of his Heap; cf. 13...