In this paper, I discuss the extent to which James Buchanan, although a founding member of the so-called "Virginia school of political economy" should be considered a Virginia political economist (VPE). In particular, I wish to debate whether Buchanan understood the role of the political economist as a truth-seeker only, one that never imposes his own beliefs and one that simply starts his analysis by the state of accepted conventions. This view of VPE cannot, I argue, describe fully what Buchanan envisioned for the economist. In particular, throughout the 1950s, Buchanan developed a view of the role of the political economist that is deeply infused with political engagement and responsibility. In Section 1, I address David Levy and Sandra Peart’s reconstruction of VPE, complement it with other sources to show the extent to which Buchanan’s and others’ writings are compatible with such view. In Section 2, I expose a number of facts and events that do not square with Levy and Peart’s reconstruction, all having to do with Buchanan’s political engagement. In Section 3, I offer a series of counter arguments that show that Buchanan was actually very concerned, especially in the 1950s, about the links between politics and political economy. The last section offers concluding remarks addressing the historiographical challenges raised by Levy and Peart’s reconstruction in the light of current debates regarding Buchanan’s work – and, more generally, VPE.