Recent analyses of popular participation in the nationalist movement have been dominated by two interconnected themes. The first relates to the issue of the ‘imperfect mobilisation’ of the masses by the Indian National Congress and the attempts of the party to appropriate various forms of autonomous popular political initiatives under the nationalist umbrella, while at the same time restraining and containing their militancy and radicalism. The second theme deals with the understanding of nationalism by the subaltern classes in terms of their own world-view, traditions and notions of moral community. Subaltern culture and traditions, including religious belief and codes of conduct, have been argued to have determined and informed the nature of their perception of nationalism and the figure of Gandhi. Central to both these themes, and connecting them, is the notion of the autonomy of subaltern political action and consciousness. This emphasis on the social, cultural and ideological autonomy of the subaltern classes has, however, often encouraged a shift away from unravelling the processes of reconstruction of culture and tradition that were facilitated precisely by the infusion of Congress nationalist rhetoric and ritual in the political arena. The actual content of the nationalist message for political mobilisation has tended to be underplayed in such interpretations, for it is seen as no more than a catalyst in subaltern politics. Subaltern nationalismis seen to be primarily autonomously generated, shaped largely by the values, practices and material concerns of the subaltern classes themselves and only marginally in interaction with wider political events and ideologies.