Holton, Woody. Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999.

Summary
This book examines the web influences and competing social groups (class relations) that pushed Virginia, in particular its elites, into the War of Independence. Holton argues that between 1763 and 1776 Indians, merchants, slaves and debtors helped propel free Virginians into the Independence movement in three distinct ways. Firstly, free Virginians’ efforts to influence imperial policy were contested by Native Americans, British merchants, and enslaved Virginians. Eliminating the government as instrument or ally of merchants, free Virginians would be in a more dominant position. Secondly, the commercial boycott strategy against Britain was attractive to Virginians as it would impel Parliament to repeal laws considered oppressive by white Americans and reduce Virginians’ debts to British merchants. Third, the boycott adopted by the First Continental Congress in 1774 transformed Virginia’s society and economy and presented opportunities for slaves and small farmers to challenge the authority of the provincial gentry. Those challenges, Holton contends, “indirectly helped induce gentlemen to turn the protests of 1774 into the Independence movement of 1776.” '''Each group challenged Virginian elite’s hold on power and authority. The elimination of British government would allow them to more easily control these factions in the colonies'''. When Virginia gentlemen launched their struggle “to preserve and extend their freedom, they were powerfully influenced by other freedom struggles – movements put together by Indians, debtors, merchants, slaves and smallholders. Thus, “Native Americans, British merchants, debtors, and enslaved Virginians indirectly and unintentionally helped to bring on the American Revolution” and in effect elite Virginians are less prominent in the revolution.

Example: Indians and merchants pursued their interests and inadvertently undermined relations between Virginia’s leadership and the British government. For example, British policy changes to control Indian insurgency had detrimental effects on the economic interests of the white settlers.

See also: (Challenge to) Bernard Bailyn and Gordon Wood,