Debate accompanying the 20th Science Festival in Warsaw [September 25, 2016] https://wszechnica.org.pl/wyklad/spor... The beginnings of the Polish state are shrouded in mystery due to the scarcity of historical sources. They are also the subject of discussion between researchers. The debate devoted to the interpretation of known written accounts and archaeological discoveries concerning this period took place during the 20th Science Festival in Warsaw. The discussion was attended by medievalists from the Institute of History of the University of Warsaw - prof. dr hab. Paweł Żmudzki and historian prof. dr hab. Jacek Banaszkiewicz from the Institute of History of the Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, who appeared in place of the absent archaeologist prof. dr hab. Przemysław Urbańczyk from the Institute of Archaeology of the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University. The debate was opened by prof. Żmudzki, who presented source accounts describing the genesis of the Polish state and the history of historical and archaeological research devoted to this issue. He began by citing the stories described by Gal Anonim, Wincenty Kadłubek, Dzierzwa and in the "Kronika Wielkopolska". The aforementioned accounts were first subjected to critical reflection by Jan Kochanowski in his essay "O Lechu i Czechu historia naganiona". He formulated the thesis, which is still the foundation of historical research, that only those accounts that are confirmed by independent sources can be considered credible. Kochanowski therefore considered the accounts of the above-mentioned chroniclers to be fictitious. He was followed by 18th-century historians, such as Adam Naruszewicz and Gotfryd Lengnich, who considered Mieszko to be the first ruler of Poland – the first about whom there are accounts from independent sources. 20th-century researchers began – as Professor Żmudzki said – "to regret Mieszko's ancestors" mentioned in various chronicles. Outstanding medievalists such as Henryk Łowmiański and Gerard Labuda put forward hypotheses that at least Siemowit, Lestek and Siemomysł described by Gala had really existed. They claimed that dynastic memory could have preserved them correctly three generations after Mieszko. They argued that the power of Mieszko's state could not have arisen out of the blue. All these hypotheses were overturned by the revolution in archaeological research at the end of the last century. Radiocarbon dating allowed us to establish that the earliest remains of castles in Greater Poland date back to the end of the 9th century. The intensified construction process can be dated to the 1020s and 1030s at the earliest. The second stage of the revolution was the work of Professor Banaszkiewicz devoted to the first three chapters of Gala's chronicle ["The account of Piaście and Popiel. A comparative study on early medieval dynastic traditions", 1986]. He demonstrated that the ancestors of Mieszko described in it are a structural element of the dynastic myth, and therefore they cannot be treated as characters existing in reality. Prof. Banaszkiewicz joked "that he did not want to take Siemowit, Lestek and Mieszko away from the Poles". However, he explained that even if the characters mentioned by Gala existed, the legend describing them does not take into account reality and was created for a specific purpose. This is evidenced by the etymology of the names of its heroes. Siemowit refers to the land, Lestek to cunning, Siemowit to the family. They are a reflection of the features that its creators wanted to give themselves. Dr. Grzegorz Pac., who closed the first part of the discussion, pointed out that the "baptism of Poland" had not been mentioned so far as a constitutive point of Polish statehood. As he emphasized, this tradition has been present in Polish historiography since the time of Jan Długosz. He recalled the dispute on the thousandth anniversary of the baptism, when the Catholic Church and the communist authorities boisterously celebrated the anniversary – as the beginning of Christianization or the beginning of the Polish state. This year's celebrations were devoid of the then-heat. Characteristically – as the medievalist noted – the expression "the baptism of Poland" began to be commonly accompanied by the prefix "so-called". The historian emphasized the validity of such a formulation, because "people can be baptized, not states". The next part of the debate was devoted to the discussion of what Mieszko's state was and what factors contributed to its consolidation. Prof. Banaszkiewicz, who began this part of the discussion, emphasized that Poles should be proud of the uniqueness of their state. As the historian pointed out, it was established independently in the "deepest province", where the influence of the European powers of the time did not reach. According to Prof. Banaszkiewicz, its consoli