Estonia’s Setos are considered indigenous peoples (indigenous people) in the UN sense not because of geographical isolation, like mountain or rainforest tribes, but because of centuries of political, religious and cultural separation.
Linguistically, the Setos speak a southern dialect of Estonian, which in that respect makes them similar to our own Suitis or Latgalians. However, in the international understanding, and in the Setos’ own understanding, their “indigenous” status is defined by their unique history on the border between East and West.
Why are the Setos classified as indigenous?
While the rest of the Estonians were converted to Catholicism, and later Lutheranism, in the 13th century as a result of the crusades, the Setos remained outside that influence. Only in the 15th century did they adopt Orthodoxy, which then intertwined with their ancient pagan traditions. The Setos still honour their fertility god Peko and practise special rituals, such as graveside feasts, which have almost died out elsewhere in Europe. The Setomaa region lay for centuries under the rule of Pskov and Novgorod, and later Tsarist Russia, while the rest of Estonia was governed by German nobles and Swedes. This “shielded” the Setos from Western modernisation and preserved their archaic way of life. The Setos’ polyphonic singing tradition, leelo is recognised as UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage. It is not merely folklore, but a living, unbroken oral tradition passed down from generation to generation, possibly since the Stone Age.
In 2002 the Seto Congress officially declared the Setos an independent people. It should be noted, however, that only around 2,000 Setos currently live in the historical Seto lands, while the rest of the community – around 15 000 people who identify with this culture – live outside the borders of the historical region, mainly – in Tallinn and Tartu. In Russia the Setos have been granted the official status of a protected small-numbered indigenous people, while in Estonia they are legally regarded as a linguistic minority with a strong, autonomous identity.
Although from a linguistic point of view the Setos could be considered similar to Latvia’s Suitis or Latgalians, that is, as part of a larger nation with their own specific dialect, their historical path, religious identity and social status create substantial differences that bring the Setos closer to internationally recognised indigenous status.
Setos and Suitis – religious isolation and specifics
Compared with the Suitis, the main difference lies in the age and origin of the community’s identity. The Suiti community is a relatively recent and artificially created phenomenon. It formed in the first half of the 17th century, when the local nobleman Johann Ulrich von Schwerin adopted the Catholic faith and ordered his Lutheran peasants around Alšvanga to convert to Catholicism too. The uniqueness of the Suitis lies in the fact that, as a Catholic “island” in Lutheran Kurzeme, they sealed themselves off from the surrounding world, as if encapsulating themselves, preserving old costumes, wedding customs and so-called burdon singing.
Seto identity is far older and formed naturally, rather than by a nobleman’s order. While the rest of the Estonians and Latvians came under the influence of Western culture through the 13th-century crusades, the Setos remained outside it, never breaking off their ancient traditions but naturally weaving them into their way of life. That is why the Setos are not simply “different Estonians” for reasons of religion. Their culture is a direct, unbroken continuation of the ancient Finno-Ugric tribes, practising a unique religious syncretism, for example still honouring their own deities alongside Christ.
Setos and Latgalians – state borders and national consolidation
Looking at the Latgalians, the parallels seem more pronounced, since both groups spent centuries in a different political and legal space than their compatriots. Latgale, or Inflantija, remained part of the united Polish-Lithuanian state after the 1629 Truce of Altmark, while the rest of Latvia was under Swedish and German noble rule. Similarly, the Setomaa region belonged to Tsarist Russia for centuries, while Estonia was part of the Livonian and Swedish lands.
The difference lies in how the two groups fitted into the process of modern nation-building at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. The Latgalians always saw themselves as part of the wider Latvian nation. This was also stated by Latgalian national leaders at the 1917 Congress of Latgale – “we are one nation, Latvians”. The Latgalian language and culture remain one of the pillars of Latvia’s national identity today.
The Setos, by contrast, remained completely isolated from Estonia’s 19th-century national awakening. When the Setomaa territory was incorporated into the Estonian state for the first time in 1920 under the Treaty of Tartu, “modern” Lutheran Estonians looked down on the Setos with a sense of superiority, as illiterates and “half-Russians” (poluverstnik), which produced a strong counter-reaction among the Setos and a desire to defend their autonomy. Unlike the Latgalians, who integrated into a shared Latvian identity, as already noted, the Setos officially declared themselves a separate people – põlisrahvas, rather than simply an Estonian sub-ethnic group.
Why exactly are the Setos “indigenous”?
After all, the Suitis and Latgalians are regarded, in the Latvian context, as historical and cultural regional groups that helped shape the common Latvian nation. In the case of the Setos the situation is far more distinct – their culture has remained so untouched by the influence of Western civilisation that international organisations (UNESCO, FSC) classify it as a relict, self-standing ecosystem. They are indigenous because their way of life and social structure were not modernised along with the rest of Estonia, making them the direct, living heirs of the oldest Finno-Ugric culture.
Recognition of the Setos as an indigenous people, both internationally and within the FSC forest certification system, came about through prolonged legal and cultural processes, in which the Setos’ own self-determination initiatives proved decisive.
Understanding the FSC certification system
After a tense process lasting almost ten years, the FSC officially recognised the Setos, along with their neighbours — the Võro people, or võrokesed – as indigenous peoples of Estonia. This status took legal effect together with the new Estonian National Forest Stewardship Standard (FSS), which has been in force since 1 January 2026.
Getting there involved lengthy disputes and an expert assessment of the situation. While drafting Estonia’s national FSC standard, forestry sector and state representatives, including the state forest management company RMK, long objected to including the concept of indigenous peoples, since Estonian law does not classify the Setos as a separate “indigenous nation”. As the local working group failed to reach agreement, the FSC’s international Permanent Indigenous Peoples’ Committee (PIPC) was brought in, and in April 2020 it issued an official opinion that the Seto and Võro communities met the criteria for indigenous peoples. Independent experts then took over the work, developing criteria specific to Estonia by 2022.
Under FSC Principle 3, “Indigenous Peoples’ Rights”, every logging company in Estonia that wants to keep its FSC sustainability certificate must coordinate its activities with the Seto community and its representatives, the Seto Congress – whenever forestry work affects their historical territories or sacred sites, such as sacred groves known as hiis, or affects traditional resources.
The understanding of the United Nations and UNESCO
Within the UN system the Setos have not been granted a separate political “indigenous nation” sovereignty status in the General Assembly, but their rights and identity as a unique local people have been affirmed in specialised UN agencies and international reports.
The biggest international turning point came in 2009, when UNESCO, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, added the Setos’ polyphonic singing tradition, leelo, to the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. This step, de facto, confirmed that Seto culture is an ancient, self-standing and unique phenomenon that must be protected at global level. The international human-rights advocacy organisation Minority Rights Group International, which works closely with UN bodies, officially classifies the Setos as an indigenous people of Estonia (indigenous people) and, at the same time, as a national and linguistic minority.
The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers, in its decisions, for example in its spring 2023 resolutions, has directly stated that the Estonian government must maintain an active dialogue with the Setos within the framework of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, recognising their right to preserve their identity.
An important legal paradox – Estonia versus Russia
Interestingly, the Setos’ official status differs sharply on the two sides of the border. In 2010 the government of the Russian Federation officially added the Setos to the state list as the 46th officially protected small-numbered indigenous people (коренные малочисленные народы). This gives the small Seto community living in the Pskov region around Pechory the right to special state support and tax relief.
In Estonia, the Setos themselves adopted a declaration in 2002, at the 6th Seto Congress, describing themselves as an independent people – põlisrahvas. The Estonian state does not legally recognise them as a separate ethnos or indigenous nation, but regards them as an Estonian cultural and linguistic minority group. However, thanks to the aforementioned FSC standard, Estonian companies and private forest owners now have to reckon with Seto indigenous rights in practice, bypassing the state’s official political rhetoric.
Estonia’s National Forest Stewardship Standard (FSC-STD-EST-01-2026), which entered into force on 1 January 2026, introduces strict legal and practical requirements for logging in the historical Seto and Võro territories. It forces forest managers to change their working methods regardless of Estonian state law.
What rights and restrictions does the new FSC status impose on logging?
The FSC standard is based on the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), meaning indigenous peoples have the right to be heard and to influence decisions before any work begins. In the Setomaa region this translates into a mandatory requirement to consult the Setos, who hold veto rights.
Before logging begins, the state forest manager RMK, or FSC-certified private forest owners, are obliged to inform and consult with the Seto community’s authorised representatives – the Seto Congress. If the planned felling directly threatens the Setos’ traditional way of life, the community has the right to demand changes to the plan, or even to veto specific operations.
Sacred groves – hiis – and so-called cross trees, ristipuud, play a huge role in Seto culture. These are trees into which a cross is carved during the funeral procession, in memory of the deceased. The new standard imposes a complete logging ban in zones where such objects are located. Buffer zones must be created around cross trees, in which heavy machinery may not operate, so as not to damage the root system or the tree itself.
Loggers may no longer carry out extensive clear-cutting in areas that are historical Seto berry- and mushroom-picking grounds. These resources are classified as essential to the indigenous population’s economic and cultural survival.
Preference must be given to selective felling, preserving the continuity of the forest ecosystem, especially old pine forests, which are needed to sustain traditional crafts such as woodworking and beekeeping.
A living bridge to the afterlife
The cross-tree tradition in southern Estonia is one of the most unique surviving expressions of pre-Christian ritual in Europe, and it has, remarkably, survived to this day.
When a member of the community dies, the funeral procession stops on its way from the home to the cemetery at a specific, traditionally designated tree – usually an old pine or spruce by the roadside. A close male relative of the deceased carves or chisels a cross into the tree’s bark with an axe.
The Setos believe that at this moment the soul (hing) of the deceased passes into the tree. The cross serves as an “anchor”, or boundary, preventing the departed spirit from losing its way, returning home and disturbing the living, while at the same time granting it peace within the tree. In Seto understanding these trees become sacred and inviolable: they must not be felled, and not even their branches or fallen twigs may be gathered for firewood. It is believed that whoever harms a cross tree will be struck by serious illness or misfortune. Historically, such stretches of forest functioned as natural, unofficial open-air shrines lining the old roads.
How does cooperation between the Seto Congress and loggers actually work?
With the introduction of the new FSC standard, protection of these sacred sites no longer rests solely on local beliefs, but on a strict legal procedure. So that loggers cannot excuse themselves with the phrase “we didn’t know”, Estonia has created, and continually updates, a digital map of cultural-historical sites and cross trees. Seto community activists and folklorists identify these trees and enter their precise GPS coordinates into the system. Before any logging licence is issued, the system automatically shows whether such objects are present in the planned area.
If a forest owner, for example the state forestry company RMK, plans operations in the Setomaa region, the company sends a formal request to the Seto Congress’s executive body, Seto Kongressi Vanematekogu. The Seto Congress delegates local “elders” or cultural experts, who inspect the specific plot in person. They check not only the registered trees, but also gather oral history – whether the forest is a historical berry-picking site, or an ancient sacred grove. If a risk is identified, the logging company has two options – either abandon the felling entirely – if it is a sacred grove –, or change the logging plan.
A compromise is also possible, setting specific conditions for the logging. A protective buffer zone of at least 20-50 metres in radius is established around every cross tree. Within this zone the trees are left untouched. To protect the sacred trees’ root systems, heavy harvesters may not enter the buffer zone. The ground must not be ploughed or otherwise damaged.
Work is often permitted only in deep winter, when the ground is frozen, in order to minimise disturbance to the soil and surrounding environment. If a company ignores the Seto Congress’s objections and fells a cross tree, it will instantly lose its FSC certificate, meaning losses running into millions of euros.
Why has the Estonian state historically been so reluctant to grant official indigenous status?
The fact that Seto indigenous rights are now upheld through the world’s influential FSC system is the result of Estonia’s long-standing political resistance to including this term in state law. There are three main reasons for this reluctance. The most important of them – the concept of a “single and indivisible” Estonian nation. Estonian statehood ideology has, since the early 20th century, rested on the assumption that all Estonians, including the Setos and Võros, form one core nation. Estonia’s Constitution is written to protect “the Estonian nation, language and culture”. The government fears that legally recognising the Setos as a separate indigenous people would artificially fracture Estonian identity and set a precedent for separatism among other regional groups, such as the residents of Saaremaa or Hiiumaa.
The second factor is economic. As shown by FSC published data, forests cover roughly half of Estonia’s territory, and logging is a very important pillar of the Estonian state economy. If the state officially recognised the Seto and Võro communities as indigenous peoples with sovereign rights to land, that would give them a legal basis to demand the transfer of a huge area of state forest – almost all of south-eastern Estonia – into community management. The state forest manager RMK has long resisted this, since it would mean smaller logging volumes and bureaucratic complications.
The third reason is a very significant one, namely the “Russia question”, since real geopolitical risks exist. The Setos’ historical land – Setomaa – is currently divided, with part in Estonia and part – in Russia. As noted, Russia already began, back in 2010, to make extensive use of the Seto indigenous-status theme in its propaganda, to portray itself as a “defender of small peoples”, while accusing Estonia of assimilating the Setos. In Tallinn, the concept of indigenous peoples has historically been associated with political risk, since there is concern that such a legal status and collective rights might, in future, also be sought by Estonia’s large Russian-speaking community, for example in the Narva region, in pursuit of territorial or cultural autonomy.
The Estonian state’s approach: “You are Estonians, your culture is our wealth, but you will not get any special political status written into law.” However, the global market and the FSC standard have proven stronger than state rhetoric – if Estonian timber exporters want to sell their output to, for example, IKEA, which requires FSC certification, they must in practice observe Seto rights, even where these are not written into state law.