Dungad, called also Dungal, was a native chieftain, Maormor, or “Jarl,” in the north-east corner of Caithness, who seems to have considered the policy of conciliation preferable to that of resistance, judging from the intimate relations he formed with the foreigners, marrying the daughter of one, and giving his daughter in marriage to another, of the chiefs of the invaders. His _bœ_ or hamlet of residence became on this account so well known to the Norsemen, that they named the district of Dungalsbae (now Duncansbay) by it, and spoke of the headland (now Duncansbay Head) on which it was situated, as Dungalsness, or Duncan’s cape. The supposed remains of his castle were seen by Pennant in 1796, and are described by him as the ruins of a circular building, in all probability one of the “burghs” or circular towers so common in the north of Scotland, which seem to have been the defensive habitations of the native Celtic or Pictish population of the period between the 6th and 9th or 10th centuries. It is now a green mound. From the Session Records of the parish it appears that the district retained its ancient name of “Dungasby” down to the beginning of the last century, when it first appears as Duncansbay, and to this day it is called “Dungsby” by the older inhabitants. The name of the adjacent district of Canisbay, now applied to the whole parish, is similarly derived from _Conan’s bæ_. It appears between 1223 and 1245 as Canenesbi (Sutherland Charters), and in Blaeu’s Atlas, the MS. maps of which were drawn (_circa_ 1620), by Mr. Timothy Pont, the minister of the adjacent parish of Dunnet, it is marked Conansbay. These two, Duncan and Conan, are the only native chieftains of Caithness at the time of the Norse invasion whose names have come down to us, probably because they were the only ones who held friendly relations with the invaders. Footnote 234: In the Saga of Olaf, Tryggvi’s son, it is said that Earl Sigurd lay at Asmundarvag, now Osmundwall, in the south end of the island of Hoy. There is a place called Roray on the west side of the island, which might be the ancient Rörvag. Footnote 235: Munch (Chronicon Manniæ, p. 46) alludes to the mistake so common among the historians of Scotland to confound the _two_ Malcolms, and to make one of them, as if one Malcolm only (Malcolm II.) reigned from 1004 to 1034. Though this theory has been ingeniously supported from a Norse point of view, it is at variance with the concurrent testimony of the early Scottish Chronicles. The Saga is the only authority for this marriage; but admitting its testimony on this point to be unassailable scarcely necessitates the repudiation of the authority of the Scottish Chronicles on the question of the succession. (Compare Skene’s Highlanders, chap. 5; Robertson’s Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. ii. p. 447; and Fordun (Skene’s edition), text and notes.) Footnote 236: