Felicianova Manor
historical manorial estate in Latvia
Felicianova Manor is a Neo-Gothic manor house in the Cibla Parish of Ludza Municipality, in the historical region of Latgale, in eastern Latvia.
Origin of the manor name
The origin of Felicianova's name is not clearly known, but there are two versions. According to first version Angel Dionizi the eldest son of Ignatius ruled Zabolotjes Manor and Ignatius second son Andrew - Eversmuiža Manor (1769), but Ignatius' brother, Felicians, was probably a temporary owner of the land of the expelled landlord Jan Bugvecki and had only begun to establish Felicianova's ( nova - new) half manor, or folverku, but already in 1786 Ozupine Manor owner is Zaremba. According to second version Felicia ( Felicia nova ) - female name, but no such name is known in this manor.
History
Felicianova is a relatively new manor. In 1784 it was not yet in the general description of manors. In the territory of the Ozupine manor there is mentioned the folklore Felicianova , where there was only one wooden animal house by the wells . The Felicianov mill, too, has not yet existed, it is mentioned under Morozovka village and belonged to Eversmuiža. Ozupine then owned Mary Zaremba, from which the Plen family could buy land and build a significant estate, mainly due to industrial companies. Agriculture was less important.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Felicianova Manor” is historical manorial estate in Latvia. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Felicianova, Manor and historical, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “historical manorial estate in Latvia” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Maps, plans, fabric surveys and administrative records can establish how the site’s name, extent and function changed over time. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 19, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5441747. The first chronological checks are 1769, 1786 and 1784.
Architectural summaries often privilege surviving fabric and can understate demolished phases, contested use or displaced communities. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Felicianova Manor”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Felicianova Manor primary sources, Felicianova Manor archive and Felicianova research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Felicianova Manor”?
- Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Felicianova Manor” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.