When first meeting, Vikings and natives of Scotland often experienced violent clashes. However, as time passed, they helped shape each other to equal and sometimes opposite degrees. There are several hypotheses describing the details of early interactions between Vikings and natives.1 Among the many proposals, two theories appear most often. The first states that the Vikings founded an earldom and thereafter ruled over the native Scottish population. Sometimes this county is described as peaceful, other times more violent. The second claim asserts that a genocide occurred in which the Vikings eliminated and replaced the native populations.2 The evidence for both models is contradictory and variously justifiable. The best explanation therefore is a synthesis of both hypotheses. That is to say, both the county and the genocide took place under different circumstances. Viking ship bands were often federations, and as such individual rulers within the federation were expected to have some latitude. In some areas the Viking captains completely exterminated the natives they found. In other cases, leaders simply subdued the people they encountered. In areas where the local population was left alive, they influenced the Scandinavian settlers to varying degrees in terms of religion and material culture. In contrast, the Viking presence in Scotland forced the native inhabitants to become more militant and politically united.3 Furthermore, the natives also eventually adopted parts of the Scandinavian language, material culture, and customs. The Vikings first made contact in 8th century Shetland. From there they headed south to Orkney and Caithness, future... mid-card... kingdom of Wessex.21 In conclusion, both textual and archaeological evidence may be contradictory regarding the exact nature of early encounters with the native Vikings. Some evidence supports genocidal tendencies, other evidence supports Native integration. Evidence supporting the different theories has been presented above, but even that presented represents only a fraction of the evidence, both archaeological, textual, and linguistic, that supports the various models. It is also important to note that Scotland has still been left woefully unexplored by modern archaeologists, and that further investigation could provide key answers to reconciling the disparity of evidence. Until then, it seems that the most logical conclusion to draw is that of the middle ground, whereby both the genocidal and more peaceful Vikings arrived and ushered in different circumstances for the natives..