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,