literatures, the foreign-language sources for Caucasian history applied indiscriminately several equivalents of 'king' and of 'prince' or 'dynast' to representatives of the dynastic aristocracy of Caucasia (162). On the other hand, these national literatures, when they appeared, revealed a rich social terminology (163). These monuments restrict the royal title to the holders of the super-dynastic Crown (High Kings and Emperors) and call the subordinate dynasts by various equivalents of 'prince,' 'duke,' or 'lord.' It appears that in earlier times this distinction was not very clear, in Caucasia as elsewhere (164), and this is the reason why it was not found in the contemporary foreign-language sources. But, after this distinction had become revealed in national documents, foreign sources too, appeared conscious of it when treating of things Caucasian (165).