We invite submissions for a special issue of the Journal of Early Modern Studies (JEMS) devoted to a reappraisal of the history of mechanical philosophy.
Although historiography has often treated it as a monolithic category, the label “mechanical philosophy” has been conceived as internally divided since its very establishment. Classical mid-twentieth-century literature identified within it two main strands: one focused on the mathematization of natural phenomena, the other on causal mechanical explanation. Even within this composite framework, however, scholars pointed to a number of fixed features: the rupture with the Aristotelian tradition, the reduction of nature to matter and motion, and its eventual crisis in the wake of the rise of Newtonian physics. More recent historiography, by contrast, has advanced a more nuanced and fragmented picture. It has questioned the applicability of the category to many authors canonically regarded as mechanical philosophers, and has highlighted the limits of this paradigm when applied to scientific fields treated as less central by the classical literature on the subject.
This special issue takes up the historiographical challenge of accounting for such diversity, by considering mechanical philosophy as a tradition articulated in multiple forms and across successive generations of authors. To address this heterogeneity, we propose a diachronic reexamination of mechanical philosophy as an evolving intellectual tradition rather than a rigid doctrinal label. Instead of restricting it to a fixed ontology or a set of explanatory models, we encourage reflection on how the term was employed and developed by historical actors operating within diverse geographical, institutional, editorial, and technological contexts. Through case studies as well as more general reflections on the category, this issue seeks to provide a renewed perspective on what makes this category both unified and, ultimately, heuristically valuable for historians of early modern philosophy and science.
We seek contributions that delve into, but are not limited to, the following issues:
- Mechanical Philosophy and its Pre-History: What distinguishes early mechanical philosophers such as Descartes, Hobbes, and Gassendi from other earlier or contemporary alternatives to Aristotelianism (e.g., non-mechanical corpuscularian theories, chymistry)? To what extent did later mechanical philosophers adopt, transform, or distance themselves from these alternative approaches in shaping their own conceptual frameworks?
- Engaging with Aristotelianism: The rupture with the Aristotelian-scholastic tradition is canonically regarded as one of the defining features of mechanical philosophy. Yet this rupture did not manifest itself in a uniform way. With which specific Aristotelian traditions did the mechanical philosophers engage? Did this break always entail outright rejection, or did it sometimes involve processes of appropriation, transformation, or even reconciliation? What rhetorical, argumentative, and strategic devices did mechanical philosophers employ to position themselves in relation to Aristotelianism?
- Recovering Antiquity: Examining how mechanical philosophers invoked the authority of ancient sources, including not only Democritus, Epicurus, and Lucretius, but even Moses, in establishing illustrious precedents in natural philosophy.
- Mechanical Philosophy and Mechanics: Exploring the contested relationship between mechanical philosophy and the science of mechanics. How did quantitative problem-solving and the analysis of machines interact with, diverge from, and influence causal mechanical explanations?
- Shaping the Tradition: Exploring how different generations of mechanical philosophers, spanning from the early 17th century to the early 18th century, engage with the intellectual legacy of their predecessors. In particular, do their critiques and reassessments indicate an internal evolution within the tradition of mechanical philosophy, or do they represent a rupture and opposition?
- Mechanical Philosophy in Context: How did technological innovations, new institutional frameworks, and emerging publishing practices influence the development and transformation of mechanical philosophy? Should it be understood as a transnational tradition, or else do local, national, and social factors significantly shape its form and content?
- Matter and Motion at Stake: Investigating the ways in which later mechanical philosophers dealt with the rise and growing prominence of alternative research programmes, most notably Newtonianism.
Call for Papers: Revised Submission Guidelines
We invite expressions of interest from scholars eager to contribute to our upcoming volume.
If you wish to contribute, please send a brief CV, an expression of interest, and an abstract (approx. 300 words) to simone.bresci@unive.it. Please note that expressions of interest will be considered on a rolling basis, but we encourage you to submit yours as soon as possible, and no later than 15 June 2026. Authors whose expressions of interest are accepted will be invited to submit full papers of up to 7.000 words.
The deadline for full paper submissions will be 30 September 2026. All submitted papers will undergo a rigorous, double-blind peer review process. Our aim is to complete the peer-review process by Winter 2026-7, allowing for revisions and final submissions by Spring 2027, with publication as issue 1/2027 by the end of April 2027. We look forward to receiving your contributions.
Guest Editors: Simone Bresci (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy) and Omar Hraoui (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy / Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Netherlands)