considered Kshatriyas, but also tribes which were dominant over one or more other tribes often arrogated to themselves the name of Kshatriya and had their claim allowed. Our writer has confused clans and tribes. There were clans or kindred families which dominated over the rest of the people of their own tribe, and there were some tribes which dominated over several tribes. Both of these classes were called Kshatriyas. The term Kshatriya was applied without regard to race or color. Any people who happened to be dominant called themselves Kshatriya and were accepted as such when they could exact homage. Kshatriyas were no close corporation. They were no organized body. Had the Moghals or the present Englishmen been without organized priesthood, and had they accepted the Brāhmanas as their spiritual guides and taken pains to adopt the elevating sacraments, they also could have formed one of the Kshatriya castes. These Kshatriyas had by no means drawn a sharp line between themselves and the masses as the Brāhmanas had done. How could they do so? Success in competition for the throne never depends on membership in a particular family. The man who rose, raised his whole family or tribe to Kshatriyahood; but when a tribe failed in strength, the whole tribe suffered in status. The history of the Ksatriya varna with all its vicissitudes is a subject of very great complexity and interest and one which needs a special treatment.
I may state here that a wrong notion that Kshatriya was one united Indian jāti composed of royal families of Aryan race has done much toward the misconstruction of various ancient documents, and has led
