Archpriest G. V. Florovsky and K. N. Leontiev: the religious origin of “Byzantinism” in the cultural and historical process and the first prerequisites for neopatristic synthesis

The article raises the topical issue of the existence of a probable connection between the idea of the cultural-historical ideal (Byzantine Orthodoxy) of the Russian nation, which was developed by G. V. Florovsky in the Eurasian period of his work, and the “Byzantinism” of K. N. Leontiev. The methodological basis for this study was mainly the means of comparative analysis of the works of these authors and the scientific synthesis of the obtained theoretical provisions and ideas. It is emphasized that the issue raised is of interest in the context of modern studies interpreting the Eurasian period as the basis for the process of forming the concept of neopatristic synthesis, in which Florovsky relied on the idea of returning to the tradition of Byzantine patristic theology. It has been established that Leontiev’s conceptual ideas were present in Eurasianism, where they received a unique interpretation, including from one of the leaders of the movement, Florovsky, in terms of criticism of European rationalism and Slavophilism, as well as an appeal to the thought of A. I. Herzen. It is shown that the idea of a genuine cultural and historical ideal of the Russian nation developed by Florovsky was similar in its specificity to the religious principle of Leontiev’s Byzantinism. A hypothesis is put forward and reasoned that Florovsky could have paid attention to the religious principle of Leontiev’s Byzantinism under the influence of V. S. Solovyov, as well as in connection with the apolitical nature of his views, which manifested itself when understanding the causes and consequences of the Russian revolution of 1917. As a result, it is demonstrated that, compared to other Eurasianists, Florovsky’s ideas were the closest to Leontiev’s concept of Byzantinism. Moreover, it seems that it was precisely this concept that formed the basis of Florovsky’s thought about the need to create a new synthetic philosophy, definitely reminiscent of his future concept of neopatristic synthesis.

Leontiev’s Byzantinism, Florovsky’s neopatristic synthesis, cultural and historical ideal of Russia, criticism of Slavophilism, ideology of Eurasianism