MANYAM REBELLION 33 against the British rule in the hills. It was an anti-colonial war due to pressures from below, which, no doubt, used the "fituri tradition" as well as other forms of belief s and myths to rally the tribal masses. Unlike in the eWlier "fituris", popular participation in the Manyam rebellion made it a form of peasant protest from below. What made this rebellion all the more interesting was its direct and indirect links with nationalist ideology and movements in the plains.169 An indirect influence, and perhaps to some extent even a direct one was the revolutionary terrorism'of Bengal and, Punjab through its leader Raju. Both official sources as well as the "folk tradition" refer to his links with terrorists.The rebellion had its direct links with non-cooperation under the leadership of the Congress in ihe plains. First of all, the tribal masses had been activated by the Congress pracharakas who kindled hopes with their slogan of "Swaraj in one year". Later, Raju himself had been active in spreading the passive programme of non-cooperation—establishment of panchayat courts, anti-liquor campaign, khaddw etc—in the hills. When Gandhi called off non*cooperation in 1922, like many peasants and middle classes in the plains, both Raju and the tribal masses must have also felt disillusioned with Congress politics, for neither had swaraj been established nor had any grievances of the peasants and tribals been removed. Raju with his radical ideas must have perceived this disillusionment as an ideal opportunity to rouse the masses against British rule and establish ' ^waro/"170 by a different route. The failure of Raju in transforming this vision into reality was due to the might of the British army in the immediate sense. At the ideological level, Raju failed to perceive the class interests operating in the nationalist movements under Gandhian leadership in the plains.171 Neither were the dominant political forces ready to merge with the Manyam rebellion, given, their class politics, nor was there on the horizon any kind of a spontaneous or organised peopled rebellion against the British, once they had been deserted by the Con'gress leader-silip without achieving anything in concrete terms. 169 This in fact proves that Arnold's assumption of "territoriahty" acting as a strong brake on extending the rebellion into plains is utterly wrong. See, ibid, pp 140-142. 170 However, Arnold argues that Raju started the war "in keeping with his Kshatriya traditions" and also due to the fear of his arrest by police in January 1922. See ibid, pp 135-136.. But we have clearly shown how Raju had developed his own political ideology before starting his anti-British war in the hills. Surprisingly, Arnold ignores the role of Raju's political ideology and ^the influences leading to the formation of that radical ideology. ^ 171 For a theoretical critic of Gandhian ideology and specified forms of struggles, «ee E M S Nainboodiripad, "Non-Violent Non-cooperation—the Technique of the Indian Bourgeoisie", New Age, August 8^ 1954, pp 34-48-, "Gandhism in Evolution—Retreat and Regrouping", New^Ag&, September 9, 1954, pp 51-60.