Konstantin Leontiev’s Concept of Byzantism as a Social Ideal and Modern Russia

Abstract

The article discusses the concept of byzantism developed by the prominent Russian notionalist Konstantin Leontiev and its signifi cance for modern Russia. A counterintuitive conclusion can be drawn on how much relevance Leontiev’s ideas still hopelessly retain for understanding the peculiarities of modern Russia, its cultural and historical type and uniqueness. The beginning states the obvious reason to turn to Leontiev’s ideas today: a number of his predictions or prophecies have come true in the history of the twentieth century. In terms of, so to speak, predictive eff ectiveness, he had no match among Russian notionalists. Then follows the consideration of Leontiev’s concept of byzantism. Leontiev deepened the generally accepted idea of Russia being Byzantium’s religious successor and comprehensively rethought it from the coherent cultural-historical and religious-political perspective. In a nutshell, one could say that the basic theses in his concept of byzantism contained three all-embracing points: the Orthodoxy and the Tsar, or the Eastern Christianity and the autocracy, and their religious and political union. This social ideal possesses distinct external (despotism, various social constraints and inequality) and internal (intense inner spiritual life) sides. Though they come as the two sides forming an integral unit, the second, internal side is more important and fundamental than the fi rst, external one. The necessary condition of byzantism as a cultural and historical type at the personal level is also noted. The author argues the existence of a kind of unspoken and hybrid byzantism that even today continues to preserve and defi ne the uniqueness of Russia. It is represented by, fi rst of all, an unspoken alliance of quasi-monarchical presidential power, when the president comes to power by formal and democratic way, but cannot be democratically evicted out of his post. A strong authoritarian government is impossible without the internal willingness of the people to obey the “party in power” as long as it maintains its authority. Among other things, this kind of power is necessary to keep together diff erent peoples, ethnic groups and regions of Russia with their diff erent cultures and traditions. While this national diversity threatens Russia with disintegration, it is, on the other hand, the key to its vitality and its complex fl owering. Secondly, it is represented by an important social role of religions being traditional for Russia — mainly Orthodoxy and the Russian Orthodox Church, and, accordingly, traditional moral values in the life of the society.