lilla_my's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
4.0
It was an interesting, informative book but my impression was that it would be primarily about enslaved and indentured people who had limited options in life. Instead, the focus was mostly on white debtors and how they influenced the people around them. The subtitle should've been "debtors and the making of the American Revolution". Slaves and native americans felt like a side note. Although they're a side note, I give this book props for being somewhat progressive for when it was published.
cucumberedpickle's review against another edition
3.0
Great look at the revolutionary war in Virginia! New perspective that is thoroughly argued. It challenges the traditional beliefs and creates a voice for grassroots as well as other forgotten players. Very interesting!
lukescalone's review against another edition
4.0
This is a nice social history of the decisions that went into the choice to declare independence from the perspective of the colony (now state) of Virginia. While many earlier studies had focused on the importance of America's landed gentry, most notably George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, Holton uses this book to examine the role that other social groups played in bringing about the call for independence in Old Dominion. To do this, he argues that four social groups--British merchants, Native Americans, African slaves, and indebted smallholders--influenced Virginia's gentry while also making their own demands, ultimately pushing the gentry to sign the Declaration of Independence.
In doing so, Holton argues that these groups propelled Virginians to call for independence in three different ways. First, Native Americans and British merchants heavily influenced Virginia's border policy. Holton looks at the scholarship by earlier historians who argue that the Proclamation of 1763 made little difference in the coming of the revolution, but he begs to differ. While it is true that smallholders and settlers were able to cross the Proclamation line and settle east of the Appalachians, the same power was not true of Virginian land speculators. They were enraged about British policy, which was maintained by British merchants--whose economic interests were maintained by preventing American expansion--and by various Native American groups, especially the Cherokee--who the British had little desire to go war with.
Second, free Virginians of all stripes--whether smallholder or gentry, especially those who were indebted--found pre-revolutionary boycotts to be particularly useful tools. In addition to having the ability to repeal laws that they found reprehensible, they also believed that they could leverage boycotts into guarantees that the British would liquidate their debts. This was particularly appealing to smallholders, who found that their debts had increased exponentially, in large part due to Britain's Navigation Acts.
Finally, the boycotts exposed deep cleavages in Virginian society, which caused the Virginian public sphere to break down into two camps. The first camp was a small group of people, led by General Dunmore, who would become loyalists to the British cause. The second, however, was much larger and was made up of a motley crew that cut across socio-economic classes and was led by the independence-minded House of Burgesses. Finding better opportunities under British rule, enslaved Africans offered to aid Dunmore in exchange for their freedom. After a bit of quaffling, Dunmore accepted their proposal in late 1775. This enraged free Virginians, inadvertently making the pro-independence camp even larger. Those who sat on the fence between the two groups, and even some loyalists, shifted to the "patriotic" camp.
Finally, in early 1776 after the publication of Common Sense many more smallholders came to believe that they would receive greater political rights should they choose to leave the British Empire. They saw a much more democratic path for themselves than what had previously been offered by hierarchical British structures.
I'm sure that this text has since been surpassed, but it was an eye-opening work on political pluralism and competing grievances in the years just before the American Revolution. Highly recommend.
In doing so, Holton argues that these groups propelled Virginians to call for independence in three different ways. First, Native Americans and British merchants heavily influenced Virginia's border policy. Holton looks at the scholarship by earlier historians who argue that the Proclamation of 1763 made little difference in the coming of the revolution, but he begs to differ. While it is true that smallholders and settlers were able to cross the Proclamation line and settle east of the Appalachians, the same power was not true of Virginian land speculators. They were enraged about British policy, which was maintained by British merchants--whose economic interests were maintained by preventing American expansion--and by various Native American groups, especially the Cherokee--who the British had little desire to go war with.
Second, free Virginians of all stripes--whether smallholder or gentry, especially those who were indebted--found pre-revolutionary boycotts to be particularly useful tools. In addition to having the ability to repeal laws that they found reprehensible, they also believed that they could leverage boycotts into guarantees that the British would liquidate their debts. This was particularly appealing to smallholders, who found that their debts had increased exponentially, in large part due to Britain's Navigation Acts.
Finally, the boycotts exposed deep cleavages in Virginian society, which caused the Virginian public sphere to break down into two camps. The first camp was a small group of people, led by General Dunmore, who would become loyalists to the British cause. The second, however, was much larger and was made up of a motley crew that cut across socio-economic classes and was led by the independence-minded House of Burgesses. Finding better opportunities under British rule, enslaved Africans offered to aid Dunmore in exchange for their freedom. After a bit of quaffling, Dunmore accepted their proposal in late 1775. This enraged free Virginians, inadvertently making the pro-independence camp even larger. Those who sat on the fence between the two groups, and even some loyalists, shifted to the "patriotic" camp.
Finally, in early 1776 after the publication of Common Sense many more smallholders came to believe that they would receive greater political rights should they choose to leave the British Empire. They saw a much more democratic path for themselves than what had previously been offered by hierarchical British structures.
I'm sure that this text has since been surpassed, but it was an eye-opening work on political pluralism and competing grievances in the years just before the American Revolution. Highly recommend.
More...