8

Ever since the Tea Party movement—claiming to defend America’s revolutionary heritage—appropriated the name of the group of “Patriots” who dumped British tea into Boston Harbor in 1773, the debate over the meaning and significance of the American Revolution has occupied a central role in the “history wars” in the United States. By analyzing the scholarship and public interventions of Gordon S. Wood—who represents the more traditionalist side in today’s “politics of history”—this article will not only identify the contentious issues in this debate but also expose the problems and obstacles that a conservative historiography faces in the United States. First, we will sketch the general contours of Wood’s historical narrative of the American Revolution. Second, we will demonstrate how his scholarship, particularly his uncritical celebration of American democracy, bears witness to a nationalist impetus. Third, his historical trajectory will be contextualized within the United States’ current “history wars.” Finally, this article will explain why it is wrong to call Wood’s scholarship “conservative,” exposing the seemingly insurmountable challenges of conservative history writing in the United States.