Why is it that in everyday conversation, and even in official discourse, Latgale is still often mentioned with an air of condescension, implying that the region is, if not backward, then certainly (not in a complimentary sense) different? Can this be explained historically?

Discourse and narratives about the backwardness of Latgale as a region were one of the theories (or viewpoints) most actively cultivated in the 1930s. There was a choice of how to view it: whether Latgale was distinct or whether it was backward. Especially after 15 May 1934, when the slogan “United for Latvia!” appeared, the thought occurred quite mechanically: “Latgale is backward.” Backwardness can be forced through various economic and social measures, for instance, by sending officials to work in Latgale, by providing agronomic and other types of economic assistance, by having an army presence in Daugavpils (the fortress) and Rēzekne, by implementing school-building programmes, and through financial injections via banks. The idea was clear – as a result of such activities, Latvia would become more uniform and more Latvian.

Today, we see the aforementioned problem not in backwardness (provided, of course, that one doesn't qualify it as a peculiarity). It is a whole host of specific Latgalian manifestations. First, we need to understand the factors that determined the region's specificity. To recap: administrative isolation (for 400 years), a different administrative division, large—even huge—parishes, a Baltic-Slavic contact zone, Russification, colonisation, and (to a small extent) Polonisation as well, serfdom abolished much later—a whole generation after the rest—, a delayed national awakening, and a ban on the press. Over time, all of these things have created certain specific manifestations.

Can they still be felt 100–150 years later?

Yes, indeed! Still today, the functioning of the local language and the significant role of Catholicism, circumstances which are now referred to as multiculturalism, and cautious management. Naturally, historically we are talking about the 16th, 17th, and subsequent centuries, but now, in the 21st century, past events should be taken into account, as certain knowledge, attitudes, or understandings have been passed down from generation to generation. I wouldn't blame everything on history, though; that would not be correct.

We can talk about a conditional 'provincial factor', which is a concept that can be evaluated in different ways, because, for example, one can hide well in the provinces. Another thing is that a province also means distance. Distance from something or to something. An excellent example: in a very short time, Daugavpils became a significant transport hub; by 1860–1870, one could already travel from the city in five directions by rail, and the city began to flourish, becoming an important centre in the entire Baltic region with a strong working class. In 1914, when the First World War began, around 5,000 workers were evacuated from the city along with the factories – a very large number! By the way, the first railway in Latvia crossed Latgale itself – the St. Petersburg–Warsaw railway line via Kārsava, Rēzekne, and Daugavpils, followed by the Riga–Daugavpils–Minsk line. In this regard, there is a story that at a banquet in Daugavpils, Russian builders working on the Riga–Daugavpils–Minsk railway met the Frenchmen who were building the St. Petersburg–Warsaw line. The banquet was a success, but the builders behaved very differently. The Russians were very solemn and exhilarated; the French were emphatically business-like, drinking a great deal of wine. That is how different civilisations met in Daugavpils. The railway was a major investment in infrastructure at the time.

As a result of the railway's creation, a Latgalian gained the opportunity to leave – by one route to Riga, by the other to St. Petersburg. Where did the Latgalian go? To St. Petersburg! The largest emigration and the largest Latgalian community outside Latgale at that time (the beginning of the 20th century) formed in St. Petersburg. The spiritual factor was also significant: St. Petersburg was a Catholic centre, whereas Riga was foreign, German, and Lutheran. This is a difference worth noting.

If we look at other times, for example, today the biggest farmers in Latgale think: how far is it to the ports, how far do we have to drive, how much will they pay for grain there? That is how the saying 'distant Latgale' arose. Have you ever heard anyone say 'distant Kurzeme' or 'distant Liepāja'?

Liepāja is far, Ventspils is far, Daugavpils is further...

If you look at the kilometres, Liepāja is not much closer to Riga than Daugavpils (216 and 226 km respectively). But the proximity of the sea and the organised infrastructure somehow 'diminish' the distance to Liepāja...

For example, the parish of Līksna, where I live, is crossed by the Riga–Daugavpils highway. The land in the parish is well-tended, the roads are good, there is no mud; the land itself is not particularly fertile, it is very sandy. In the parish of Kalupe, where I was born, a lot of the land has become overgrown, the roads are muddy, there is no asphalt in the countryside, and in some places, there is no electricity either. But the land there is good – real Latgalian clay! It requires entrepreneurial spirit and cooperation, which is not very developed in Latgale. Latgalians are very warm-hearted, but that is a daily occurrence: visiting people or socialising. Rational thinking, breaking down land boundaries, and collaborating with others is still a 'suspicious' undertaking. For 400 years, economic conservatism has reigned in the region. One thing is that the plots of land are small – in Latgale, land is divided among all the children (unlike in Kurzeme and Vidzeme, where the eldest child inherits the land), the birth rate was high, there were many children, and the idea of 'one's own little corner of land' is still alive and held onto very tightly.

The Polish-era management model – the semi-manor – was very inefficient, not market-oriented, and mostly intended for self-consumption. But... this philosophy is still felt now and then.

Catholicism also plays a role: over time, Lutheranism has developed a sense of private entrepreneurship, whereas in Catholicism, this is to some extent a sin. Catholicism is, in a way, closer to Orthodoxy, which is also one of the reasons why Latgalians went to St. Petersburg – 'we will surely understand each other somehow with the Orthodox; it will be better that way'.

In answering your question, I mentioned several historical storylines which, of course, do not explain everything, but they do show a certain trajectory. The result is what we see. Yes, the contact zone and the proximity of other peoples have significance!

A hypothesis of mine, indirectly related to this: when the voluntary vaccination ends, I would gladly compare two maps – how Latgale voted for joining the European Union and how it vaccinated. I think the maps will be very similar.

Borders and the time 100 years ago. Could we have been larger as a country? 30 years ago or more, during the Awakening, it was said that Baltic tribes lived far beyond the current borders.

That is the case and has been debated much. But! It must be noted that everywhere in the world, the question of borders has always been and continues to be important. At one time, we lived as part of empires, transitioning to nation-states, and drawing borders was a fairly complicated issue. There is a belief: nothing is more controversial than drawing borders. One must adhere to a principle, and in this case, it would be: once we have agreed, we will no longer touch the borders. Any change, even by a metre, can provoke a conflict or even a war. Recent events also testify to this. Therefore, once an agreement was reached, it is good that it was, and let it remain so!

That was also the case with the Latvian–Russian border in 1920. The territory inhabited by Balts has, of course, been larger; when driving by car through Belarus, you still see and read Latgalian names 5–10 km from the Latvian border, as if you were still in Latgale. In the past, there was the Russian Empire, there was Poland, there was Sweden. Poland had a very precise border with Sweden – the Aiviekste – but... historically, there has never been a similar, precise border with Russia – it was either forest or bog... For 200 years, there were no borders.

In 1920, Latvia had a very favourable time and moment that had to be used, and it was used. A concept was introduced that the linguist A. Bīlenšteins recorded – the ethnographic border. At that time, they trusted the expert, they did not run around and measure where the 'last Latgalian' lived, because that way one could end up in Moscow. The ethnographic border was set, the army acted accordingly, Latvia had good allies, and Russia agreed to the proposal. In my opinion, the result is very optimistic. Of course, what happened in 1944 with Abrene and the six parishes was a pointlessness and a whim of the occupier, as well as manipulation of the population. History cannot be rewritten; there cannot be precedents in the world like 'today we will shift things a little bit'.

Is it possible to name a few significant historical facts about the Latgale region that are less widely known in Latvia?

After finishing my studies, I started researching the history of Latgale 'from scratch'. At the University of Latvia, I knew nothing about Latgale; during my years of study, we were given very little knowledge about it. I arrived in Daugavpils and began to investigate, study, read, and delve deeper. Daugavpils Fortress is an excellent symbol of the city, which in recent years has become known throughout Latvia. At the beginning of my career, I went there with students and... even the people of Daugavpils did not know what the fortress in their city looked like. As time went on, I thought it was necessary to collect as much information as was available; that is how the online database 'Latgales dati' (in calendar form, about 10,000 persons, 7,000 facts and events about Latgale, about 6,000 photographs – latgalesdati.du.lv) came into being. It is important to me how the life of the region has formed, how it has developed and functioned. The region itself is one part of the story, but it is important how it has functioned in a broader sense. To understand that, you must know what has been and what has happened. Imants Ziedonis said it accurately: 'A local historian is a collector'. Hearing the question, I thought about these 7,000 facts and events.

For example, there is the famous Russian painter Ilya Repin, who had a summer house in Vitebsk; it suffered in a flood, and Repin came to Daugavpils to see what the city looked like. In his memoirs, he described how he wanted to buy a house in Mežciems (Poguļanka). It didn't work out. He was interested in how to defend Daugavpils from floods. There, a small story that fits into the history of that time and the broader history like a bright brushstroke!

Daugavpils – the castle of the Daugava. The symbol of Daugavpils is bridges. Bridges that connect both banks of the Daugava are bridges between Latgale and Zemgale, Latgale and Sēlija, and the Governorates of Kurzeme and Vitebsk. For example, in 1817, serfdom still existed on one bank, while on the other bank, in Kurzeme, free people were buying land. The ideas of the First Awakening of Latgale came from the left bank of the Daugava: the Latvians Kalniņi, wealthy farmers from the Governorate of Kurzeme, invited the Young Latvians, who were frequent guests in their home, including K. Valdemārs.

The Vienības Nams (Unity House) is symbolic in Daugavpils, which was the largest building structure in pre-war Latvia and which still 'holds up' very well.

Speaking of Latgalian personalities, still among us is the writer Anita Liepa (author of the book 'Exhumation'), a participant in the Second World War who saw Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz in her life (after Hitler's suicide, he was President of Germany for a short time). In 1945, Anita Liepa worked in a Flensburg hospital near the Danish border, and one morning, on her way to work, she saw K. Dönitz giving a speech. A. Liepa is the daughter of a Latvian officer, raised in a very patriotic family; during the war, she was still in secondary school and distributed leaflets during the German occupation. As the end of the war approached, she and her mother set off for Germany, later returning because she 'saw her house in a dream'. At a filtration camp, she was asked: 'Do you know, my girl, where you are going?' 'Yes, to my father's house!' Unfortunately, she experienced the Soviet system to the full extent because... What did she do during the German era? She was in an anti-fascist organisation, participated in the resistance movement. What did she do there? Fought for an independent Latvia... Ah... Welcome to Siberia! ... Anita Liepa has recorded her memories of Flensburg; I encourage my students to read them. ...how everything is so intertwined in one person's life.

Of course, the story of Mark Rothko, who was born in Daugavpils, is significant.

At one time, there was much talk about the teaching or not teaching of Latvian history... You at Daugavpils University receive the 'work results' of schools

Almost everyone is truly ready to express their opinion on history and education. There are specific, fundamental things (methods) for how to teach history. Regarding Latvian history, there has always been a dispute – whether to integrate it or teach it separately. During the Soviet period, they taught facts, now they say again – teach facts. The difference: the selection of facts or the criteria for it are always subjective; in the Soviet era, the selection of facts had a purpose – to teach and consolidate Soviet views. There were no 'forest brothers', there was no legion, there were the glorious Red Army soldiers and the true communists. Now, a fact has a different purpose – what that knowledge (of the fact) gives us, what skills we acquire. The goals are pluralistic, to understand the causal relationships: who we are against the backdrop of the world and Europe. The current history curriculum allows us to see ourselves!

For example, while searching for necessary information, I found that in 1971 in Europe, translated into six languages, the song 'Butterfly, my Butterfly' (Butterfly, my Butterfly) was very popular. What were we singing in 1971?

'Teic, kur zeme tā' (also 'Somu pirts', 'Savāda vasara', 'Dūdieviņš'...)

Yes, that was here, in Latvia! If you compare what they were singing and demanding in the Union – 'Зачем вы девушки красивых любите' or 'Не плачь, девчонка, солдат вернётся'...

The history of a district or region is important because of the local aspect: local events, local people, local stories. The history of Latvia tells of 'big things', for example, Bermont, the War of Independence; researchers use reliable, verified, and verifiable historical sources. A local historian uses surrounding and findable things, which we call cultural monuments, and tells (talks) about them. Archival documents used by historians have an academic function, whereas local material has an educational function, as it is passed down from generation to generation.