Mieszko I
Mieszko I | |
---|---|
Duke of Poland | |
Reign | 960–992 |
Predecessor | Siemomysł |
Successor | Bolesław I the Brave |
Born | c. 930 |
Died | 25 May 992 Poznań, Poland | (aged 61–62)
Spouse | Doubravka of Bohemia Oda of Haldensleben |
Issue more... | Bolesław I the Brave Świętosława Vladivoj, Duke of Bohemia (?) Mieszko Świętopełk Lambert |
Dynasty | Piast |
Father | Siemomysł |
Religion |
|
Mieszko I (Polish pronunciation:
He was the first
Mieszko I's alliance with the Czech prince,
According to existing sources, Mieszko I was a wise politician, a talented military leader and a charismatic ruler. He successfully used diplomacy by concluding alliances, first with Bohemia, then Sweden and the Holy Roman Empire. In foreign policy, he placed the interests of his country foremost, even entering into agreements with his former enemies. On his death, he left to his sons a country with greatly expanded territories and a well-established position in Europe.
Mieszko I also enigmatically appeared as "Dagome" in a
It is roughly to his borders that Poland was returned in 1945.
Early life
There is no certain information on Mieszko I's life before he took control over his lands. Only the Lesser Poland Chronicle gives the date of his birth as somewhere between the years 920–931 (depending on the version of the manuscript); however, modern researchers do not recognize the chronicle as a reliable source. Several historians on the basis of their investigations postulated the date of Mieszko I's birth to have been between 922–945;[3] the activity of the Duke in his final years of life puts the date of his birth closer to the latter year.[4]
Mieszko's name has traditionally been thought to be a diminutive of Mieczysław but this is refuted by the majority of modern historians. According to a legend first described by Gallus Anonymus,[citation needed] Mieszko was blind during his first seven years of life. This typical medieval allegory referred to his paganism rather than an actual disability. Another name of Mieszko, "Dagome", appears in the Dagome iudex document, though its origin is uncertain.[5]
Reign
Early reign
Mieszko I took over the rule after his father's death c. 950–960, probably closer to the latter date.
Mieszko and his people were described around 966 by
By the time Mieszko I took over from his father, the
In 963
Margrave Gero's war; Mieszko's homage to the Emperor
The chronicle of Thietmar poses some problems of interpretation of the information regarding the attack of Margrave Gero on the Slavic tribes, as a result of which he purportedly "subordinated to the authority of the Emperor Lusatia and the Selpuli [viz., the Słupian tribes] and also Mieszko with his subjects". According to the majority of modern historians,
The homage is then a separate issue, since, according to the chronicle of Thietmar, Mieszko actually paid tribute to the Emperor from the lands usque in Vurta fluvium (up to the
Marriage and conversion to Christianity
Probably in 964 Mieszko began negotiations with the Bohemian ruler
The next step was the baptism of Mieszko. There are different hypotheses concerning this event. Most often it is assumed that it was a political decision, intended to bring Mieszko's state closer to the
A different hypothesis is linked with the above-mentioned acceptance of the veracity of Gero's invasion of Poland. According to it, it was the attack of the Margrave that forced the Catholicization, which was to be an act of subordination to the Emperor, done without the mediation of the Pope.[20]
Still other motives were responsible according to Gallus Anonymus, who claimed that it was Dobrawa who convinced her husband to change his religion. Likewise chronicler Thietmar attributes Mieszko's conversion to Dobrawa's influence. There are no reasons to negate Dobrawa's role in Mieszko's acceptance of Roman Catholicism; however, crediting rulers' wives with positive influence over their husbands' actions was a common convention at that time.
It is generally recognized that the baptism of Mieszko I took place in 966.
Conquest of Pomerania
After the normalization of relations with the Holy Roman Empire and Bohemia, Mieszko I returned to his plans to conquer the western part of Pomerania. On 21 September 967 the Polish-Bohemian troops prevailed in the decisive battle against the Wolinians led by Wichmann the Younger, which gave Mieszko control over the mouth of the Odra River.[23] The German margraves had not opposed Mieszko's activities in Pomerania, perhaps even supported them; the death of the rebellious Wichmann, who succumbed to his wounds soon after the battle, may have been in line with their interests. A telling incident took place after the battle, a testimony to Mieszko's high standing among the Empire's dignitaries, just one year after his baptism: Widukind of Corvey reported that the dying Wichmann asked Mieszko to hand over Wichmann's weapons to Emperor Otto I, to whom Wichmann was related. For Mieszko the victory had to be a satisfying experience, especially in light of his past defeats inflicted by Wichmann.
The exact result of Mieszko's fighting in the west of Pomerania is not known. Subsequent loss of the region by Mieszko's son
War against Margrave Odo I of Ostmark
In 972 Poland was attacked by Odo I, Margrave of the Saxon Ostmark. According to the chronicles of Thietmar, Odo acted unilaterally, without the Emperor's consent: "Meanwhile,[24] the noble Margrave Hodo, having collected his army attacked Mieszko, who has been faithfully paying tribute to the Emperor (for the lands) up the Warta river."[25]
There are different hypotheses concerning the reasons for this invasion. Possibly Margrave Odo wanted to stop the growing power of the Polish state. Very likely Odo wanted to protect the Wolinian state, which he considered his zone of influence, from the Polish take-over.[26] Possibly the Wolinians themselves called the Margrave and asked his help.[27] In any event, Odo's forces moved in and on 24 June 972 twice engaged Mieszko's army at the village of Cidini, commonly identified with Cedynia. At first, the Margrave defeated Mieszko's forces; subsequently the Duke's brother Czcibor defeated the Germans in the decisive stage, inflicting great losses among their troops. It may be that Mieszko intentionally staged the retreat, which was followed by a surprise attack on the flank of the German pursuing troops.[28] After this battle, Mieszko and Odo were called to the Imperial Diet in Quedlinburg in 973 to explain and justify their conduct. The exact judgment of the Emperor is unknown, but it is certain that the sentence was not carried out because he died a few weeks after the Diet. It is commonly assumed that the sentence was unfavorable to the Polish ruler. The Annals of Altaich indicates that Mieszko was not present in Quedlinburg during the gathering; instead, he had to send his son Bolesław as a hostage.[29]
Mieszko's conflict with Odo I was a surprising event because, according to Thietmar, Mieszko respected the Margrave highly. Thietmar wrote that "Mieszko would never wear his outdoor garment in a house where Odo was present, or remain seated after Odo had gotten up."
It is believed that in practical terms the victory at Cedynia sealed Western Pomerania's fate as Mieszko's dependency.
Acquisitions in the east
According to archaeological research, during the 970s the
Some historians suggest that the regions of Sandomierz, Lublin and Czerwień (western Red Ruthenia) were indeed annexed by Mieszko's state in the 970s, as lands valuable for trade reasons and as a starting point for a future attack against what was to become Lesser Poland, then in the hands of Bohemia. Sandomierz under this scenario was the central hub of the area, with Czerwień, Przemyśl and Chełm assuming the function of defensive borderland strongholds.[40]
Involvement in German internal disputes; Second marriage
After the death of Emperor Otto I in 973 Mieszko, like his brother-in-law, Duke Boleslav II of Bohemia, joined the German opposition in support of the attempted imperial succession of Henry II, Duke of Bavaria. Mieszko may have been motivated by revenge because of the (presumably) negative verdict of the Quedlinburg summit, but, more importantly, he may have wanted more favorable terms for his cooperation with Germany.[41] The participation of Mieszko in the conspiracy against Otto II was documented in only one source, the chronicles of the monastery in Altaich in its entry for the year 974. The Duke of Bavaria was defeated, and Emperor Otto II regained full power. Shortly afterwards, the young emperor waged a retaliatory expedition against Bohemia, in 978 forcing Duke Boleslav into submission.
In 977 Mieszko's wife, Dobrawa, died. At first there were no apparent repercussions, as the Polish ruler had maintained his alliance with Bohemia.
In 979 Otto II supposedly attacked Poland. Mention of this event can be found in the Chronicle of the Bishops of Cambrai from the 11th century. The effects of this expedition are unknown, but it is suspected that the Emperor did not succeed. Due to bad weather, the Emperor was back at the border of Thuringia and Saxony in December of that year. It is uncertain whether the invasion actually took place. The chronicle only stated that it was an expedition "against the Slavs". Archaeological discoveries appear to support the thesis of Otto II's invasion. In the last quarter of the 10th century there had been a radical expansion of the fortifications at Gniezno and Ostrów Lednicki, which may be associated with the Polish-German war, or the expectation of such.[42] The duration of the expedition suggests that it may have reached as far east as the vicinity of Poznań.[43]
The Polish-German agreement was concluded in the spring or possibly summer of 980,
- When Bolesław's mother died his father married, without permission from the Church, a nun from the monastery in Kalbe, daughter of Margrave Dietrich. Oda was her name and her guilt was great. For she scorned her vows to God, and gave preference to the man of war before him (...). But because of the concern for the well-being of the homeland and the necessity to secure its peace, the event caused no break of relations, instead a proper way was found to restore concord. For thanks to Oda the legion of followers of Christ became augmented, many prisoners returned to their country, the shackled had their chains taken off, and the gates of prisons were opened for the trespassers.[46]
- When
Although Thietmar made no mention of warfare that possibly took place on this occasion, the information on the return of the accord, acting for the good of the country and release of prisoners indicate that a conflict actually did occur.[47]
The marriage with Oda considerably affected the position and prestige of Mieszko, who entered the world of Saxon aristocracy. As a son-in-law of Margrave Dietrich, he gained an ally in one of the most influential politicians of the Holy Roman Empire. As the Margrave was a distant relative of the Emperor, Mieszko became a member of the circle connected to the imperial ruling house.
Cooperation with Sweden and the war against Denmark
Probably in the early 980s Mieszko allied his country with Sweden against Denmark. The alliance was sealed with the marriage of Mieszko's daughter Świętosława with the Swedish king Erik. The content of the treaty is known from the traditional account—not entirely reliable, but originating directly from the Danish court—given by Adam of Bremen. In this text, probably as a result of confusion, he gives instead of Mieszko's name the name of his son Bolesław:
- The King of the Swedes, Erik, entered into an alliance with the very powerful King of the Polans, Bolesław. Bolesław gave Erik his daughter or sister. Because of this cooperation the Danes were routed by the Slavs and the Swedes.
Mieszko decided on the alliance with Sweden probably in order to help protect his possessions in Pomerania from the Danish King Harald Bluetooth and his son Sweyn. They may have acted in cooperation with the Wolinian autonomous entity. The Danish were defeated c. 991 and their ruler was expelled. The dynastic alliance with Sweden had probably affected the equipment and composition of Mieszko's troops. Perhaps at that time the Varangian warriors were recruited; their presence is indicated by archaeological excavations in the vicinity of Poznań.[48]
Participation in German civil war
In 982 Emperor
The Emperor left a minor successor, Otto III. His regency was claimed by Henry II of Bavaria. Like in 973, Mieszko and the Czech duke Boleslav II took the side of the Bavarian duke. This fact is confirmed in the chronicle of Thietmar, which noted that "There arrived [at the Diet of Quedlinburg] also, among many other princes: Mieszko, Mściwoj and Boleslav and promised to support him under oath as the king and ruler".[49]
In 984 the Czechs took over Meissen, but in the same year Henry II gave up his pretension to the German throne.
The role played by Mieszko I in the subsequent struggles is unclear because the contemporary sources are scarce and not in agreement. Probably in 985 the Polish ruler ended his support for the Bavarian duke and moved to the side of the Emperor. It is believed that Mieszko's motivation was the threat posed to his interests by the Polabian Slavs uprising. The upheaval was a problem for both Poland and Germany, but not for Bohemia. In the Chronicle of Hildesheim, in the entry for the year 985 it is noted that Mieszko came to help the Saxons in their fight against some Slavic forces, presumably the Polabians.[50]
One year later, the Polish ruler had a personal meeting with the Emperor, an event mentioned in the Annals of Hersfeld, which reported that "Otto the boy-king ravaged Bohemia, but received Mieszko who arrived with gifts".
According to Thietmar and other contemporary chronicles the gift given by Mieszko to the Emperor was a camel. The meeting cemented the Polish-German alliance, with Mieszko joining Otto's expedition against a Slavic land, which "together they wholly devastated (...) with fire and tremendous depopulation". It is not clear which Slavic territory was invaded. Perhaps another raid against the Polabians took place. However, there are indications that it was an expedition against the Czechs, Mieszko's first against his southern neighbors.[51] Possibly on this occasion the Duke of the Polans accomplished the most significant expansion of his state, the takeover of Lesser Poland.[52]
Thietmar's narrative, however, raises doubts as to whether the joined military operation actually happened. The chronicler claims that a settlement was then concluded between the Emperor and the Bohemian ruler Boleslav II the Pious, which is not mentioned in any other source and is contrary to the realities of the political situation at that time.
Another debatable point is Thietmar's claim that Mieszko "subordinated himself to the King".[53] Most historians believe that it was only a matter of recognition of Otto's royal authority.[54] Some suggest that a fealty relationship could have been involved.[55]
War against Bohemia; incorporation of Silesia and Lesser Poland
Whether or not the German-Polish invasion of Bohemia actually happened, the friendly relations between the Czechs and the Poles came to an end. Bohemia resumed its earlier alliance with the Lutici, which, in 990, resulted in a war with Mieszko, who was supported by Empress Theophanu. Duke Boleslav II was probably the first one to attack.[56] As a result of the conflict Silesia was taken over by Poland. However, the annexation of Silesia possibly took place around 985, because during this year the major Piast strongholds in Wrocław, Opole and Głogów were already being built.[57]
The issue of the incorporation of Lesser Poland is also not completely resolved. Possibly Mieszko took the region before 990, which is indicated by the vague remark of Thietmar, who wrote of a country taken by Mieszko from Boleslav.[58] In light of this theory, the conquest of Lesser Poland could be a reason for the war, or its first stage. Many historians[59] suggested that the Czech rule over Lesser Poland was only nominal and likely limited to the indirect control of Kraków and perhaps a few other important centers. This theory is based on the lack of archaeological discoveries, which would indicate major building investments undertaken by the Bohemian state.
After its incorporation, Lesser Poland supposedly became the part of the country assigned to Mieszko's oldest son,
Some historians, on the basis of the chronicle of Cosmas of Prague, believe that the conquest of the lands around the lower Vistula River took place after Mieszko's death, specifically in 999.[61] There is also a theory according to which during this transition period Lesser Poland was governed by Bolesław, whose authority was granted to him by the Bohemian duke.[62]
Dagome iudex
At the end of his life (c. 991–992), Mieszko I, together with his wife Oda and their sons, issued a document called Dagome iudex, where the Polish ruler placed his lands under the protection of the pope and described their borders. Only a later imprecise summary of the document has been preserved.
There are two main theories concerning reasons behind the issuing of Dagome iudex:
- According to the first theory the document was an effort to transform the existing missionary bishopric into a regular organization of the Catholic Church, that would cover all of Mieszko's state. This understanding implies that the arrangement led to payment by Poland of Peter's Pence.[63]
- The second theory assumes that the document was created in order to protect the interests of Mieszko's second wife Oda and their sons (who were named in the document) after Mieszko's death. Bolesław, Mieszko's eldest son, whose mother was Dobrawa, was not named in the document.[64]However, one of Mieszko's and Oda's sons, Świętopełk, also was not mentioned.
Dagome iudex is of capital importance for Polish history because it gives a general description of the Polish state's geographical location at the end of Mieszko's reign.
Late reign, death and succession
During his last years of life Mieszko remained loyal to the alliance with the Holy Roman Empire. In 991 he arrived at a gathering in Quedlinburg, where he participated in the customary exchange of gifts with Otto III and Empress Theophanu. In the same year he took part in a joint expedition with the young king to Brandenburg.
Mieszko died on 25 May 992.: Złota Kaplica) at the Poznań Cathedral, where the damaged remains found in the 14th-century tomb of Bolesław were placed.
According to Thietmar Mieszko I divided his state before his death among a number of princes. They were probably his sons: Bolesław I the Brave, Mieszko and Lambert.
In 1999 the archeologist Hanna Kóčka-Krenz located what's left of Mieszko's palace-chapel complex in Poznań.[67]
Legacy
Mieszko is chiefly credited with the unification of Polish lands. His state was the first state that could be called Poland. He is often considered the founder, the principal creator and builder of the Polish state.
At the end of his rule, Mieszko I left to his sons a territory at least twice as large as what he inherited from his father. The most significant were the additions of Silesia, Western Pomerania, and probably Lesser Poland including Kraków. He was the first ruler to conduct efficient foreign policy, which included agreements with Germany, Bohemia and Sweden, and prudently used his military resources.
Mieszko is featured on the obverse of the 10 Polish złoty banknote.[70]
Marriages and issue
According to Gallus Anonymus, before becoming a Christian Mieszko had seven pagan wives, whom he was required to relinquish, leaving Dobrawa as his only spouse. Nothing is known of the fates of any possible children from these relationships.
- Bolesław I the Brave (Chrobry)(b. 967 – d. 17 June 1025).
- Cnut the Great, king of Denmark, England, Norway and parts of Sweden (the Anglo-Scandinavian or North Sea Empire), as well as Harald II and Świętosława. She was also the grandmother of Gunhild, the wife of Henry III, Holy Roman Emperor.
According to one hypothesis there was another daughter of Mieszko, married to a Pomeranian Slavic prince; she could be a daughter of Dobrawa or of one of the previous pagan wives. According to one theory, this unnamed daughter of Mieszko I and her Pomeranian husband were the parents of
In 978/79, Mieszko married
- Mieszko (b. c. 979 – d. aft. 992/95)
- Świętopełk (b. ca. 980 – d. bef. 991?)
- Lambert (b. c. 981 – d. aft. 992/95).
After a struggle for power between Bolesław I and Oda with her minor sons (Bolesław's half-brothers), the
Bibliography
- Jasiński K., Rodowód pierwszych Piastów, Warszawa-Wrocław (1992), pp. 54–70.
- Labuda G., Mieszko I, (in) Polski Słownik Biograficzny, vol. 21, 1976.
- Labuda G., Mieszko I, Wyd. Ossolineum, Wrocław 2002, ISBN 83-04-04619-9
- Labuda G., Pierwsze państwo polskie, Krajowa Agencja Wydawnicza, Kraków 1989, ISBN 83-03-02969-X
- Philip Earl Steele Nawrócenie i Chrzest Mieszka I 2005, ISBN 978-83-7730-966-7
- Philip Earl Steele, Homo religiosus: the phenomenon of Poland’s Mieszko I, [in] The dawning of Christianity in Poland and across Central and Eastern Europe, Peter Lang, 2020, ISBN 978-3-631-78725-0
- Szczur S., Historia Polski średniowiecze, chap. 2.2.1 Państwo gnieźnieńskie Mieszka I (pp. 47–57) i 2.4.1 Drużyna książęca (pp. 83–84), Wydawnictwo Literackie 2002, ISBN 83-08-03272-9
See also
- Prehistory and protohistory of Poland
- Poland in the Early Middle Ages
- History of Poland (966–1385)
- List of Poles
References
- ISBN 978-0-313-26007-0.
- ^ a b Prinke, Rafał T. "Świętosława, Sygryda, Gunhilda. Tożsamość córki Mieszka I i jej skandynawskie związki [Świętosława, Sygryda, Gunhilda. The identity of Mieszko I's daughter and her Scandinavian relationships".
- ^ ca. 922 (O. Balzer), between 930–932 (A.F. Grabski), ca. 935 (K. Jasiński), between 940–945 (S. Kętrzyński).
- ^ Jerzy Strzelczyk "Mieszko pierwszy", vol. IV
- ISBN 978-1281936776.
- ^ K. Jasiński, Siemomysł, Polski Słownik Biograficzny, vol. 37, 1996, pp. 58–59.
- ^ Gerard Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 18–22
- ^ a b Początki Polski w nowym świetle (The beginnings of Poland in new perspective) by Tomasz Jasiński, p. 17. The Polish Academy of Sciences, Portal Wiedzy www.portalwiedzy.pan.pl "Nauka", April 2007
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 85; S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, pp. 34–35
- ^ S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, p. 34; Henryk Łowmiański, Początki Polski, vol. V, p. 502; G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 121–122
- ^ Jerzy Wyrozumski – Dzieje Polski piastowskiej (VIII w. – 1370) (History of Piast Poland (8th century – 1370)), Kraków 1999, p. 76
- ^ Jerzy Wyrozumski – Dzieje Polski piastowskiej (VIII w. – 1370) (History of Piast Poland (8th century – 1370)), Kraków 1999, p. 77
- ^ see for example G. Labuda, Mieszko I, chap. III.2.
- ^ see for example Henryk Łowmianski, Początki Polski, Warsaw, 1973.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. II chap. 29
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, chap. III.2.; A.F. Grabski, Bolesław Chrobry, p. 25
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 43–45.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 92
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, chap. IV.3.
- ^ H. Łowmiański, Początki Polski, pp. 342–345.
- ^ Between 965–967 according to the Monumenta Poloniae Historica ed. by A. Bielowski, vol. II, Lwów 1872; in 966 according to Tadeusz Wojciechowski.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 92–97.
- ^ Probably not the main stronghold of the region – Wolin. G. Labuda, Mieszko I, cap. V.3.
- ^ At that time, Emperor Otto I was in Italy.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. II p. 29
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 122.
- ^ J.P. Sobolewski, Niemcy, Polska a Pomorze Zachodnie w latach 971–972, "Kwartalnik Historyczny", Vol. 95, 1988, No. 1. The same argument was also given by S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, p. 51.
- ^ According to the reconstruction of the battle by W. Filipiowak.
- ^ Weiland, Ludwig (1871). Die grösseren Jahrbücher von Altaich (in German). Berlin: Franz Duncker. p. 5.
- ^ Historia Polski średniowiecze, p. 35.
- ^ The limits were described in the document issued by the bishop of Prague to Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor. This document is preserved in the Chronicles of Cosmas of Prague and is considered a reliable copy; from G. Labuda Mieszko I pp. 148–151.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 160, 174.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, cap. VII.4.
- ^ Hensel, Witold (1960). The Beginnings of the Polish State. Polonia Publishing House. p. 47.
- ^ Jenkins, Romilly James Heald (1962). Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Adminstrando Imperio: Volume 2, Commentary. Athlone Press. pp. 139, 216.
- ^ Łowmiański, Henryk (1976). "Problematyka początków państwa polskiego w nowszych badaniach historycznych". Slavia Antiqua. 23: 105–106.
- ISBN 978-0837187570.
- ISBN 978-0901215796.
- ISBN 978-9004229808.
- ^ A. Buko, Małopolska "czeska" i Małopolska "polańska" pp. 153–158.
- ^ S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, p. 52.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, chap. VI.4.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 158.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 153.
- ^ It is understood that the marriage took place around 979–980 (S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, p. 53).
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. IV cap. 57
- ^ G. Labuda, Bolesław Chrobry p. 44.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 134.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. IV chap. 2
- ^ S. Szczur, Historia Polski średniowiecze, pp. 54–55.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 168.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 174.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol IV, chap. 9; Chronicles of Hildesheim, p. 986.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 180–185; Marian Jedlicki, Stosunek prawny Polski, Poznań, 1939, p. 33.
- ^ Henryk Łowmiański, Początki Polski, vol. V, p. 563.
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 171.
- ^ Andrzej Buko, "Archeologia Polski wczesnośredniowiecznej", 2007, Ed. Trio.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. I p. 33; argument presented by G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 171.
- ^ Henryk Łowmiański, Początki Polski, vol. V; A. Buko, Małopolska "czeska" i Małopolska "polańska"
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. IV chap. 58; this theory is presented by G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 176.
- ^ In favor: G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 172–173.
- ^ Henryk Łowmiański, Początki Polski, vol. V
- ^ This theory has been presented in various forms by historians, including Robert Holtzmann, Stanisław Zakrzewski (Najdawniejsza bulla, pp. 21–23) and Henryk Łowmiański (Początki Polski, vol. V, pp. 602–603).
- ^ S. Zakrzewski, Najdawniejsza bulla, pp. 11–12; G. Labuda, Mieszko I, pp. 193–195.
- ^ Thietmari chronicon, vol. IV chap. 58
- ^ In 1951 the historian Helena Zoll-Adamikowa examined the alleged resting place of Mieszko, but found no signs of burial. It is not certain that the Cathedral had already been built before Mieszko's death, and the first mention of this as his burial place comes only from the chronicles of Jan Długosz.
- ^ The Warsaw Voice – In brief (30 October 2008)
- ^ G. Labuda, Studia nad początkami państwa polskiego, p. 324
- ^ G. Labuda, Mieszko I, p. 201.
- ^ "Narodowy Bank Polski - Internet Information Service". www.nbp.pl. Retrieved 17 September 2022.
- ^ Oswald Balzer (Genealogy of the Piasts, Kraków 1895) stated that Mieszko I had at least one son born from a pagan wife. The theory was based on the allegation that Mieszko's son, who was to be placed by order of Otto I in 973 as a hostage after the Imperial Diet of Quedlinburg, could not be Bolesław I the Brave because he was too young. This argument is refuted by Jan Widajewicz (Czy Bolesław Chrobry był w młodości zakładnikiem u Niemców?, Roczniki Historyczne, vol. XVI, 1947, pp. 243–250). Modern historians have no doubts that the Polish prince who was placed as the imperial hostage was Bolesław I.
- ^ J. Žemlička, Čechy v době knižecí, Prague 1997, pp. 72–73.