² Ambrosius, Lloyd E., “Woodrow Wilson and World War I” in A Companion to American Foreign Relations, ed. Schulzinger, Robert D. (Maiden, MA, 2003), 149–67.Google Scholar

³ Baker, Ray Stannard and Dodd, William E., eds., The Public Papers of Woodrow Wilson, 6 vols. (New York, 1925-1927), 4: 184–88.Google Scholar

⁴ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 4: 407–14.Google Scholar

⁵ For the ongoing debate over the balance of power and hegemony, see Ikenberry, G. John, ed., America Unrivaled: The Future of the Balance of Power (Ithaca, NY, 2002).Google Scholar

⁶ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 6–16.Google Scholar

⁷ Ross, Dorothy, The Origins of American Social Science (Cambridge, UK, 1991)Google Scholar; Lipset, Seymour Martin, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword (New York, 1996), 17–76Google Scholar; Novick, Peter, That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession (Cambridge, UK, 1988), 61–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Breisach, Ernst A., American Progressive History: An Experiment in Modernisation (Chicago, 1993)Google Scholar. For recent attempts to escape the historic framework of American exceptionalism by the Organization of American Historians' Project on Internationalizing the Study of American History, see Bender, Thomas, ed., Rethinking American History in a Global Age (Berkeley, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Santis, Hugh De, Beyond Progress: An Interpretive Odyssey to the Future (Chicago, 1996)Google Scholar.

⁸ Gamble, Richard M., The War for Righteousness: Progressive Christianity, the Great War, and the Rise of the Messianic Nation (Wilmington, DE, 2003)Google Scholar; Ambrosius, Lloyd E., Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition: The Treaty Fight in Perspective (Cambridge, UK, 1987), 12–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Marty, Martin E., Modern American Religion, Vol. I: The Irony of It All, 1893-1919 (Chicago, 1986), 398–416Google Scholar; Stephanson, Anders, Manifest Destiny: American Expansionism and the Empire of Right (New York, 1995), 113–29Google Scholar; and McDougall, Walter A., Promised Land, Crusader State: The American Encounter with the World Since 1776 (Boston, 1997), 122–46Google Scholar.

⁹ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 155–62.Google Scholar

¹⁰ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 253–61.Google Scholar

¹¹ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 329.Google Scholar

¹² , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 395–400.Google Scholar

¹³ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 413.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Mulder, John M., Woodrow Wilson: The Years of Preparation (Princeton, NJ, 1978)Google Scholar; Rowlands, David T., “Democracy, American Nationalism and Woodrow Wilson's Search for Identity” (Ph.D. diss., University of Sydney, 1999)Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Ambrosius, Lloyd E., Wilsonian Statecraft: Theory and Practice of Liberal Internationalism during World War I (Wilmington, DE, 1991), 11–12.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Nordholt, Jan Willem Schulte, Woodrow Wilson: A Life for World Peace, trans. Rowen, Herbert S. (Berkeley, 1991).Google Scholar

¹⁷ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 444–55.Google Scholar

¹⁸ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 478–81.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Boyle, Francis Anthony, Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations, 1898-1922 (Durham, NC, 1999).Google Scholar

²⁰ Zasloff, Jonathan, “Law and the Shaping of American Foreign Policy: From the Gilded Age to the New Era,” New York University Law Review 20 (2001): 1–128Google Scholar; Zasloff, Jonathan, “Law and the Shaping of American Foreign Policy: The Twenty Years' Crisis,” New York University Law Review 20 (2002): 1–100Google Scholar.

²¹ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 509–15.Google Scholar

²² , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 523–24.Google Scholar

²³ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 537–52.Google Scholar

²⁴ , Ambrosius, Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition, 136–71.Google Scholar

²⁵ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 5: 574–80.Google Scholar

²⁶ , Ambrosius, Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition, 172–250.Google Scholar

²⁷ Ambrosius, Loyd E., “Wilson's League of Nations,” Maryland Historical Magazine 65 (Winter 1970): 369–93.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ambrosius, Lloyd E., “Wilson, the Republicans, and French Security after World War I,” Journal of American History 59 (Sept. 1972): 341–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁹ , Ambrosius, “Wilson, the Republicans, and French Security,” 341–52Google Scholar; , Ambrosius, Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition, 108-13, 123, 137, 139-40, 152-53, 164-65, 211–14Google Scholar. See also Widenor, William C., Henry Cabot Lodge and the Search for an American Foreign Policy (Berkeley, 1980), 266–348Google Scholar.

³⁰ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 6: 277–92.Google Scholar

³¹ , Baker and , Dodd, Public Papers, 6: 299–310.Google Scholar

³² Ambrosius, Lloyd E., Wilsonianism: Woodrow Wilson and His Legacy in American Foreign Relations (New York, 2002), 51-64, 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³³ McDougall, Walter A., Promised Land, Crusader State, 122–46.Google Scholar

³⁴ Ikenberry, G. John, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars (Princeton, NJ, 2001)Google Scholar. References in chapters on the settlements of 1815, 1919, and 1945 show Ikenberry's extensive reliance on three historical studies: Schroeder, Paul W, The Transformation of European Politics, 1763-1848 (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar; , Ambrosius, Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition;Google Scholar and Marc Trachtenberg, A Constructed Peace: The Making of the European Settlement, 1945-1963 (Princeton, NJ, 1999). See also Gaddis, John Lewis, The Long Peace: Inquiries into the History of the Cold War (New York, 1987)Google Scholar.

³⁵ , Ikenberry, After Victory, 117–62.Google Scholar

³⁶ Knock, Thomas J., To End All Wars: Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order (New York, 1992).Google Scholar

³⁷ Cooper, John Milton Jr, Breaking the Heart of the World: Woodrow Wilson and the Fight for the League of Nations (Cambridge, UK, 2001).Google Scholar

³⁸ Despite efforts by some U.S. and foreign historians, such as the Project on Internationalizing the Study of American History, to escape American exceptionalism, that framework continues to influence historical writing on the Progressive era. The nationalist bias of American exceptionalism, which characterized that era, still shapes historical scholarship on U.S. and world history during the Progressive era. This is a fundamental problem in Dawley, Alan, Changing the World: American Progressives in War and Revolution (Princeton, NJ, 2003)Google Scholar, despite his attempt to relate American progressivism to world history and his advocacy of a new “world consciousness.” He ignored even the most outstanding scholarship by foreign historians (such as Klaus Schwabe, Jan Willem Schulte Nordholt, and John A. Thompson) on Wilson, Woodrow, “the preeminent progressive.” See my review ofGoogle Scholar, Dawley's book in Peace and Change 30 (July 2005): 398–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ Iriye, Akira, The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Vol. III: The Globalising of America, 1913-1945 (Cambridge, UK, 1993), 72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁰ Iriye, Akira, Global Community: The Role of International Organisations in the Making of the Contemporary World (Berkeley, 2002).Google Scholar

⁴¹ Smith, Tony, America's Mission: The United States and the Worldwide Struggle for Democracy in the Twentieth Century (Princeton, NJ, 1994).Google Scholar

⁴² Ninkovich, Frank, The Wilsonian Century: U.S. Foreign Relations since 1900 (Chicago, 1999).Google Scholar

⁴³ Perlmutter, Amos, Making the World Safe for Democracy: A Century of Wilsonianism and Its Totalitarian Challengers (Chapel Hill, NC, 1997).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (New York, 1992).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Mandlebaum, Michael, The Ideas that Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy, and Free Markets in the Twenty-First Century (New York, 2002).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ruggie, John Gerard, Winning the Peace: America and World Order in the New Era (New York, 1996).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ McNamara, Robert S. and Blight, James G., Wilson's Ghost: Reducing the Risk of Conflict, Killing, and Catastrophe in the Twenty-First Century (New York, 2001), 3.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ , Ambrosius, Wilsonianism, 21–29Google Scholar; Fry, Joseph A., Dixie hooks Abroad: The South and U.S. Foreign Relations, 1789-1973 (Baton Rouge, LA, 2002), 139–74Google Scholar; MacMillan, Margaret, Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World (New York, 2001), 98-106, 306–21Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Ambrosius, Lloyd E., “Wilsonian Diplomacy and Armenia: The limits of Power and Ideology” in America and the Armenian Genocide of 1915, ed. Winter, Jay (Cambridge, UK, 2003), 113–45Google Scholar; Power, Samantha, “A Problem From Hell“: America and the Age of Genocide (New York, 2002), 1–16Google Scholar; Balakian, Peter, The Hurtling Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America's Response (New York, 2003)Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ , Ambrosius, Wilsonianism, 14–18Google Scholar; Kennedy, David M., “What ‘W’ Owes to WW” The Atlantic 295 (March 2005): 36–40Google Scholar.

⁵¹ Halper, Stefan, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge, UK, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mann, James, Rise of the Vulcans: The History of hush's War Cabinet (New York, 2004)Google Scholar.

⁵² Judis, John B., The Folly of Empire: What George W. Bush Could Team from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson (New York, 2004)Google Scholar, criticized President Bush for his pursuit of an American empire, comparing him unfavorably with TR and , Wilson, who had learned “the folly of empire.” Contrary to , Judis, Gaddis, John Lewis, Surprise, Security, and the American Experience (Cambridge, MA, 2004), emphasized continuity in U.S. foreign relations from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to the Bush DoctrineGoogle Scholar.

⁵³ In contrast, Ferguson, Niall, Colossus: The Price of America's Empire (New York, 2004), 132–66, recognized the false dichotomy that some made between multilateralism and unilateralism, noting that these two approaches often went together in recent U.S. foreign relations.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ , Ambrosius, Wilsonianism, 157–73.Google Scholar