George Petrovich Fedotov

Georgiy Petrovich Fedotov (1886-1951)

Georgiy may be spelt Georgy, Georgi, Georg, George, Georges, Georgios.

Early life of Georgiy Petrovich Fedotov

On 1 October, 1886, Georgiy Petrovich Fedotov was born into the family of the manager (chancellor) of the governor's office. He was born in Saratov, a city beside the Volga River, at the mouth of the Saratovka River, halfway between Samara and Tsaritsyn.

At that time, it was in the Saratov Governorate of the Russian Empire. Saratov is situated 910 km (565 mi) southeast of Moscow.

The parents of Georgiy Petrovich were Pyotr Fedotov and Elizaveta Alexandrovna Fedotova (born Ivanova). Georgiy Petrovich had 2 brothers : Boris Petrovich and Nikolai Petrovich. Georgiy Petrovich and his brothers were brought up within the Orthodox Christian Faith in the bosom of the Russian Orthodox Church. It may be no surprise that it was the direct influence of the parents that formed the world-view of Georgiy Petrovich in particular, and also of his brothers.

Before Georgiy Petrovich was 10 years old, Saratov suffered from a cholera epidemic in 1892.

Georgiy Petrovich graduated with honours from the men's gymnasium in Voronezh, Voronezh Governorate where his parents had moved. Voronezh is situated 516 km (321 mi) west of Saratov and 515 km (320 mi) southeast of Moscow.

Higher education

In 1904, Georgiy Petrovich enrolled in the Saint Petersburg Imperial Institute of Technology.

After the beginning of the 1905 revolution in Russia he returned to his hometown, where he joined the activities of the Saratov Social Democratic Organisation (RSLDP) as a propagandist.

In August, 1905, he was arrested for his first time for participating in a gathering of agitators, but was released for lack of evidence. He continued his propaganda activities.

In the spring of 1906, he was hiding under the name of Vladimir Mikhailov in the city of Volsk on the right bank of the Volga River, 147 km (91 mi) north of Saratov.

On 11 June, 1906, Georgiy Petrovich was elected to the Saratov City Committee of the RSDLP.

On 17 August, he was arrested again and this time he was imprisoned. However, his sentence was commuted to expulsion abroad. Therefore, Georgiy Petrovich travelled to Germany.

Exile, 1906-1908, further education

First phase of development : Marxism

The first main stage of the development Georgiy Petrovich now is associated with his passion for Marxism in his early youth, his underground activities and study at the Saint Petersburg Imperial Institute of Technology. It began in 1906, when, after being exiled for 2 years abroad for revolutionary activities, he began attending classes in history and philosophy. Georgiy (Georg) P Fedotov attended lectures about history for a brief time at the University of Berlin and the University of Jena.

However, in early 1907, he was expelled from Prussia.

He then travelled to Switzerland, where he studied medieval history at the University of Geneva.

Second phase of development, 1908 : revolutionary activity ; broadening of perspective

In the autumn of 1908, Georgiy Petrovich then returned to Russia. He went back to the Faculty of History and Philology at the University of Saint Petersburg, where he had been enrolled before his arrest and expulsion to Germany. At the University of Saint Petersburg, he specialised in the history of the Middle Ages, and he concentrated his classes in the seminar of the famous mediavist Ivan M Greves. As dean of the Faculty of Philology, Professor I Greves was one of the main figures in the organisation of the seminaries and the establishment of seminary libraries of the Church of Russia. Professor Greves was a supporter of great historical excursions, which he valued both as a tool of general education, and as a "necessary kind of historical seminary", in the opportunity they opened to "meet the true traces of world culture". The Greves "school" played a significant role in the formation of Russian medieval, cultural and religious studies in the university. Amongst the students were such prominent academics as L P Karsavin, Olga A Dobiash-Rozhdestvenskaya, S S Bezobrazov (the future Bishop Cassian of Catania) and others.

The studies of Georgiy Petrovich studies under Professor Greves may be described as opening a door to the second stage of his development, during which became more concerned with the history of Russia and its roots than with the vicissitudes of politics. Moreover, G P Fedotov was like many of this teachers and colleagues, who all underwent a complex evolution from Marxism to Orthodoxy.

I M Greves

In the summer of 1910, Georgiy Petrovich had to leave the university without sitting for the exams because of the threat of arrest.

In 1911, using the passport of another person, he went to Italy, where he visited Rome, Assisi, Perugia, Venice, and studied in the libraries of Florence. Another one of the aliases that he used during his lifetime was “Bogdanov”.

In April, 1912, Georgiy Petrovich returned to Russia, and he was arrested. Despite the arrest, he received permission to sit the exams at the University of Saint Petersburg (which he passed). After serving a reduced term of exile in Karlsbad near Riga, Latvia, he was returned to the Department of General History of the University of Saint Petersburg, where he was enabled to prepare a master's thesis.

In 1916, Georgiy Petrovich completely departed from revolutionary activity (although he continued to hold socialist convictions), and he became a "privat-docent", a "private associate professor" at the University of Saint Petersburg and an employee of the Public Library.

Third phase of development : return to the Orthodox Christian Faith, 1917-1920

The third stage of the development of Georgiy Petrovich is associated with his conversion back to the Orthodox Christian Faith, and to his "churching" (1917-1920). It falls during the years of work at the Imperial Public Library (now the NLR), the oldest public library in Russia. There, Georgiy Petrovich was influenced by the outstanding Church historian Anton V Kartashev. This encounter, perhaps, became decisive for his development as a Russianist and historian. He also met the religious philosopher Alexander A Meyer. In 1918, Georgiy Petrovich began attending meetings of his religious-philosophical circle "Resurrection" in revolutionary Petrograd.

A V Kartashev A A Meyer

Georgiy P Fedotov, together with A A Meyer, published "Free Voices", the magazine of the "Resurrection Circle". With the publication of his essay "Face of Russia" in this magazine, Gregoriy Petrovich began his journalistic activities.

In 1920-1922, he taught the History of the Middle Ages at Saratov University. However, having become a professor in Saratov, he could not come to terms with the ideological pressure that had begun on science and teaching, pressure which was imposed by the Soviet State. During the last 4 months of 1922, approximately 160 intellectuals were expelled from the Soviet State. A large number of them went to various centres in Western Europe.

During 1922-1925, Georgiy Petrovich was a researcher at the first class of the Faculty of Sciences of the University of Leningrad (formerly the University of Saint Petersburg). He published several studies about the European Middle Ages : "‘Letters’ of Blessed Augustine" (1911) ; "Gods of the Dungeon" (1923) ; "Peter Abelard" (1924) ; "The Feudal Life in the Chronicle of Lambert Ardsky" (1925). His work about Dante was banned by the Soviet censors. The increasing pressure from the state made it inevitable that he leave his homeland.

Permanent exile, 1925 : France

In 1925, Georgiy P Fedotov was permitted to go to Germany in order to study the Middle Ages. Because he had become disenchanted with the political Left, he used the opportunity not to return to his homeland.

The disenchantment would be in part related to the godlessness of that political path, in contrast to the Christian socialism that is described in the Book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles (particularly the early chapters). The contrast includes the difference between imposed and voluntary sharing. There is much more to his concern, including the meaning of being a human being (created in the image of God, for the purpose of living and working in co-operation with Him, for instance), and the perception of the world (not as mere material, but the beautiful product of God's love, for instance).

Paris, 1926

Georgiy P Fedotov moved to France, where from 1926 to 1940 he served as a professor at the Saint-Serge Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris. There, he taught the History of the Western Church, the Latin language and Hagiology. At this time, he became close to Nikolai A Berdyaev and Elizabeth Y Skobtsova (tonsured the nun Marie(Skobtsova), later Sainte Marie de Paris).

In another academic direction, by 1929, the “School of the Annals”, the “new historical science”, was developing. Georges Fedotov was a contemporary of the older generation of the school and its founders Marc Blok and Lucien Febvre. He was certainly aware of this school and its theories. Nevertheless, he was already an established researcher, and in his work he developed the innovative tendencies of modern science of history. He was at the forefront of the renewal of historical knowledge. He soon became known as a publicist, and as an ecclesiastical and public figure. The well-known Paris publishing house YMCA-Press published his historical research “Saint Philip, Metropolitan of Moscow” (1928), “Saints of Ancient Rus” (1931), and “Spiritual Poems” (1935).

Georges Fedotov and historiography

According to the biography by M V Pechnikov, Georges Fedotov, as a researcher of history, is a representative of the scientific school that appeared in Russia (simultaneously, or even earlier than similar trends in the West). He and could have developed Russian historical science further, had it not been for the forcible imposition of Marxism and its theories. Many outstanding scientists, researchers of Ancient Russia, were forced to bypass ideological traps placed “from above” in every possible way, focusing on source study problems. These included both academics of the old school who worked under Soviet conditions (M D Priselkov, S V Yushkov, S B Veselovsky and others), and those formed after the 1917 revolution (A N Nasonov, L V Cherepnin, A A Zimin, Ya S Lurie, and others). Rather leaning towards the method of positivism, they contributed to the accumulation of factual data related to socio-economic and political history. The spiritual life of society in the works of historians received coverage only in the aspect of the history of ideological movements and publicistic polemics, while the main purpose of the research was to find out which views of which social group or class were expressed by this or that side, and which of them were "progressive".

His 1932 article “Orthodoxy and Historical Criticism” explains his methodology. He declares the need for a critical approach to Orthodox tradition.

Like all Russian historians of the first third of the 20th century who worked out the problems of Russian history, Georges was the heir (although not a direct student) of Vasily O Klyuchevsky. In Russian historiography, V O Klyuchevsky was preceded by Hegelian historians (the state school of S M Soloviev and others, and the historical and legal school of V I Sergeevich). They were interested in the problems of state and law, foreign policy, the activities of outstanding builders of the state and the functioning of state institutions. The attention of V Klyuchevsky, who worked in the heyday of positivism, was attracted primarily by social problems, the theme of people, social groups and classes, as well as the economy and everyday life. He also showed interest in religious and biographical matters (i.e. books about Russian lives, articles about the Venerable Sergiy of Radonezh, portraits of Russian historical figures, and the like). However, in his generalising work “Course of Russian History”, V Klyuchevsky, as Professor Fedotov noted, made a deliberate “exclusion of the entire spiritual culture while striving for a complete explanation of the process”. Professor Fedotov explained this by the “spirit of the times”, which demanded that historical science reveal the laws of social development, and assign a subordinate role to spiritual culture. Even at the beginning of the 20th century, the individual problems of Russia were worked out not by secular historians, but by Church historians, philologists, and art critics.

Vasily O Klyuchevsky

Professor Georges P Fedotov averred that the problem of scientific criticism stems from the spirit of Orthodoxy. Criticism is likened to asceticism, which cuts off false, “intellectual repentance”. Its task is “to liberate the pure basis of sacred tradition from under the historical slag that has grown in history along with the religious profit". It postulates the unity of the methodology of secular and ecclesiastical historical science, the understanding of historical criticism as source study. At the same time, the Christian historian should refrain from judging from the standpoint of common sense when assessing the events of the spiritual life as described in the sources of supernatural phenomena. The historian has no right to eliminate a fact only because the fact goes beyond the boundaries of his personal or average everyday experience. He points out the historical realism and critical approach already present in ancient Russian chroniclers and hagiographers, and later amongst representatives of Church historical science of the 19th century (E E Golubinsky,V V Bolotov and others), who breathed “the ascetic air of scientific criticism”.

Georges Fedotov opposed any attempt through misuse of the historical method to "rehabilitate" Tsar Ivan IV. Tsar Ivan's use of "Oprichnina" (terror and secret police) did not strengthen the state. Rather, it ruined the state, and this would be the result of the similar tactics of the Soviets. He based this opinion on the writings of Vasiliy O Klyuchevsky and V D Kudryatsev-Platonov. Professor Fedotov wrote, “Saint Philip gave his life in the struggle against this very state, represented by the tsar, showing that it too must submit to the higher principle of life”.

Professor Fedotov's book about the saints was conceived and written for popular understanding, but its scientific significance is indisputable. For the first time, he applied the methods of historical anthropology to the study of Russian hagiographic literature. Researchers are interested in saints as unique personalities, people who, with their common Faith, had different types of religious consciousness. Georges Fedotov is the actual creator of the scientific typology of Russian holiness. The historian's repeated use of the comparative historical method may also be noted : “Knowledge of the hagiography of the entire Christian world, primarily of the Greek and Slavic Orthodox East, is necessary in order to have the right to judge the special Russian character of holiness”.

Unlike his predecessor, V O Klyuchevsky, who wrote "Old Russian Lives of the Saints as a Historical Source" (Moscow, 1871), and who came to the conclusion about the poverty of the historical content of hagiographic literature, Georges Fedotov was not as pessimistic. Already a study by A P Kadlubovsky, "Essays on the History of ancient Russian Literature of the Lives of Saints" (Warsaw, 1902) showed the fruitfulness of studying the lives as sources for understanding the spiritual culture of the 15th-16th centuries. Nevertheless, even at the beginning of the 20th century, the study of the Russian hagiographic tradition remained in general “external, literary and historical, without sufficient attention to the problems of holiness as a category of spiritual life”.

A P Kadlubovsky

Focus on Kievan Rus' and Saint Sergiy of Radonezh

The undoubted achievements of Professor Fedotov's work include the definition of 2 spiritual directions in Kiev Caves monasticism : ascetic-heroic, reclusive and meekly obedient, aimed at serving society. Also included is the characterisation of the cult-prince-martyrs Boris and Gleb as a typical Russian veneration of an innocent voluntary death that follows the path of Christ. This characterisation highlights the categories of princely holiness, and the study of Russian foolishness as a form of prophetic service, combined with extreme asceticism. Georges Fedotov shows that beginning with Saint Theodosiy of the Kiev Caves (“the father of Russian monasticism”), a feature of Russian holiness was a relatively moderate asceticism (through fasting, physical labour, vigilance), social, public service, and "kenosis" (self-emptying), which was understood as selfless adherence to Christ. For this historian, as nowhere else in history, one can see in early Russian monks “the image of the humiliated Christ”.

We can also see the difference between the life of the saints and the life of the people in general. The monastic denial of a sinful world was not at all “Holy Rus'”. "Holy Rus'" was much more. Idealising any one part or period is dangerous. An important clarification of this concept is associated with Professor Fedotov, which makes it possible to use it scientifically : "Holy Rus'" does not refer to a people, much less a state (even though the period considered is that of "Kievan Rus'") ; rather, "Holy Rus'" refers to people of outstanding religious qualities, such as the saints of Russia. At the beginning of the 15th century, which “passes under the sign of mystical life”, we come to Saint Sergiy of Radonezh. Following the example of Saint Sergiy, a new type of monasticism became associated with his name : the saints leave the suburban monasteries and go to the forests (which became known as the "northern desert"), in search of solitude. This hermitic way was not completely new, but it seemed to be so since it was seldom practiced after the time of the Egyptian and Palestinian hermits. The trans-Volga elders of the 15th-16th centuries preserved in their primordial purity the precepts of Saint Sergiy : non-acquisitiveness (rejection not only of personal, but also of monastic property), humble meekness, love, solitude, and Divine contemplation.

A special theme in the scientific work of Professor G P Fedotov is folk religiosity. The monograph "Spiritual Poems" (1935), articles written on its basis and the corresponding sections in Russian religiosity are devoted to its study. Professor Fedotov can with good reason be called one of the discoverers of the theme of religiosity of the lower strata of medieval society in historical science and one of the first to touch upon this issue in world science.

With an almost complete absence of independent scientific thought, even in the field of theology, Ancient Russia, according to Professor Fedotov, was in no way inferior to the West in the field of historiography. This historian places a high value on Russian chronicles and chronographs, and notes a great interest in translated works on world history. The Russian chronicles are marked by "realistic historical intuition, richness of details and artistic presentation of events", while they gravitate towards the religious philosophy of history. Original Russian theology also manifested itself only in the historical sphere, and not in the rational or logical, as in the West or in the Eastern Roman Empire. Even the lives of the “Kiev” period “clearly prefer historical facts to legendary embellishment”. By this inclination towards historical realism, “Rus' in its understanding of history is closer to medieval Europe than to Constantinople” (that is, the Eastern Roman Empire).

Although he declared his adherence to the methods of Western science, in fact, Professor Fedotov follows rather the methodology developed by Lev Karsavin. In particular, this refers to the identification of religious types : “Any collective life is a unity of diversity ; it manifests itself only through individuals, each of which reflects only some of the features of general being. One cannot investigate the individual as a representative of the whole, therefore one should choose those types which are representative of various spiritual groups and which in their totality, if properly chosen, can reflect collective being”.

Meanwhile, since 1931, Georges P Fedotov had been teaching History of the Western Church and Hagiology at the Saint Sergius Theological Institute in Paris. Father Georges Florovsky was amongst his fellow-teachers at that time.

It was in 1931 that he published his “Saints of Ancient Russia, 10th-17th Centuries” (in Russian), in which he utilised his extensive grasp of hagiography, and in which he expressed particular veneration for (Saints) Paisii Velichkovsky and Seraphim of Sarov.

Georges P Fedotov participated in the work of the Russian Student Christian Movement (RSHD), and in the Fellowship of Saint Alban and Saint Sergius. In addition, together with Mother Maria (Skobtsova), he participated in the creation of a charitable and cultural-educational organisation of assistance to the Russian émigrés.

Establishment of "Orthodox Action", 1935

On 27 September, 1935, with Nikolai A Berdyaev, Mother Maria (Skobtsova)) and Archpriest Sergiy Bulgakov, Professor Fedotov established “Orthodox Action”, the Russian émigré Christian social-action organisation.

Archpriest Sergiy Bulgakov

The spiritual culture of medieval Russia was much at the centre of the historical and cultural studies of Georges P Fedotov in emigration. He published the works "Saint Philip Metropolitan of Moscow (1928) ; "Saints of Ancient Russia" (1931) ; "Poems of the Spiritual" (1935). During 1931-1939, G P Fedotov became the “Orthodox work editor” of the magazine "New City". In this publication, he attempted to synthesise a new spiritual ideal, uniting the best aspects of socialism, liberalism and Christianity.

Political and other tensions in advance of World War II, 1939

However, in 1939, there arose objections to the fact that he was writing articles on political topics in the newspaper "New Russia" and other printed bodies of the left-liberal direction. The professors of the Saint Sergius Theological Institute presented Georges P Fedotov with an ultimatum : either stop writing such articles in that newspaper and other publications, or leave the institute. This situation reflects several other underlying factors that were significant at that time. At this time, there were disturbances within the "Russian Exarchate of Western Europe". One of the concerns of Metropolitan Evlogiy (Georgievsky) was how to support the Russian Orthodox Church during the time of invasion by the Nazi Germans, and also how to protect the Saint Sergius Institute in Paris from the threat of closure.

During the controversy, Nikolai A Berdyaev defended Georges.

Move to North America, 1940-1941

When the German occupation of France began in 1940, Georges Fedotov and his family moved from Nazi-occupied Paris, first to the south of France.

Then, in 1941, they departed for the USA. Their voyage across the Atlantic Ocean was both long and risky, because of the war.

From 1941 to 1943, George P Fedotov lived in New Haven, Connecticut, and he worked as a visiting researcher at the Yale University Divinity School.

Then, from 1944, G P Fedotov served as a professor of Church History at Saint Vladimir's Orthodox Seminary in New York City, New York. Metropolitan Theophilus (Pashkovsky) requested that he and Professor Peter P Zouboff compose a memorandum to reorganise this seminary as a graduate school for theological studies. This plan was formulated by them and adopted at the Seventh All-American Sobor in 1946, in Cleveland, Ohio.

By this time, Saint Vladimir's Seminary was subsisting in a group of rented apartments in New York City, quarters associated with Columbia University and with Union Theological Seminary (at 537 West 121st Street, New York 27, NY (at Broadway), in the Morningside Neighbourhood).

In the USA, Professor George P Fedotov still devoted a great deal of energy to journalism. His articles on topical historical and political issues were published in the “New Journal”. Amongst his writings are the lengthy articles "The Birth of Freedom" (1944) ; "Russia and Freedom" (1945) ; "The Fate of Empires" (1947).

Professor George Fedotov was a frequent lecturer in New York City, a member of "Friends of Russian Culture:, and he continued to publish books up until the time of his repose in Christ.

Repose, 1951

On 1 September, 1951, George P Fedotov unexpectedly fell asleep in the Lord in Beacon, Duchess County, New York. He had suffered a coronary thrombosis. He was 65 years old.

Reflections

It was written about Professor G P Fedotov that his works are characterised by an intelligent selection of materials representative of the history of Russian philosophical thought and Russian spirituality, and good, thorough scholarship. In all, his published works number more than 200.

In English, Professor George Fedotov wrote the work “The Russian Religious Mind” (Russian religious thought), conceived as a study on the history of Russian spiritual culture from the 10th to the 20th centuries. With the support of the Humanitarian Fund, created by B A Bakhmetyev, George Fedotov wrote the first volume "Kiev Christianity : From the Tenth to the Thirteenth Century", published by the Harvard University Publishing House with funds of the same foundation in 1946.

The second volume was not completed for publication by him. According to the plan, the second volume was to become an expanded version of the book “Saints of Ancient Russia”.

Nevertheless, the book was later released in 1966 under the editorship of Archpriest John Meyendorff. This volume covers the time from the 13th century to the end of the 15th century.

In the fourth number of the 1966 issue of "Saint Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly", the Dean of Saint Vladimir's Seminary, the Archpriest Alexander Schmemann published the following book review with regard to this second volume :

We must be truly thankful to Father Meyendorff for this wonderful volume. In his Foreword he explains
what odds he had to work against to prepare Fedotov's manuscript for publication. The result rewards him
fully for his pains. The first volume, dealing with Kievan Russia, has already become a classic ; and I
have no doubt that this second volume, devoted to the early Muscovite period, will share in the same success.
We find here all those qualities which made the late Professor Fedotov a genuine renovator of hagiology :
a rare combination of historical 'akribeia' with a deep insight into spiritual realities, a unique sense
of 'balance' between analysis and synthesis.

Just as in his study of Kiev, Professor Fedotov's approach to the Middle Ages is certainly not the last word
on the complexities of Muscovite Orthodoxy ; it is rather the beginning of a reevaluation which has become
necessary. Here, as also in the first volume, there is a certain tendency toward generalisation which must
(and certainly will be) questioned again and again. Some of his verdicts seem too harsh, as, for example,
the end of his chapter on St. Joseph of Volok : 'In his struggle with Nilus and his disciples Joseph destroyed
the traditions of St. Sergius which had become too awkward and cumbersome as religious raiment for the
resplendent Muscovite tsardom' (p. 315). His 'icon' of Novgorod seems a little too idealised, too iconographic,
his 'anti-Muscovitism' too systematic. Yet all these are real questions, and the merit of Professor Fedotov is
that he has formulated the problem of Russian religious development in a tremendously fruitful way. No student
of Russian history can bypass his work. One is equally grateful to Mr. Thomas Bird for the exhaustive bibliography
of Fedotov's writings which concludes the volume.

The book “Saints of Ancient Russia” now includes a preface by Academician Dmitri S Lihachev (†1999). The academician explains the importance of this book (and especially to Russians) :

The book offered by the author to the publishing house ‘Moscow Worker’ was never
published in the Soviet Union. This is a very academic scientific study devoted
to the Old Russian lives of the saints, written by an excellent prose master,
Georgiy Petrovich Fedotov.

Why is this book so important to us today ? First of all, it reminds us of the moral
ideals that raised more than one generation of our ancestors. The myth of the backwardness
of ancient Russia has long been dispelled by scientists, but still continues to be rooted
in the minds of a great number of our compatriots. We have already understood the height
of old Russian arts, sometimes still unattainable for us, and we begin to understand the
meaning of the old Russian music and literature.

I am glad that the promotion of Old Russian music is increasing, and it finds more and more
followers. With the old Russian literature the situation is more complicated. First, the
level of culture has fallen. Secondly, access to primary sources is extremely difficult.
The publication of the ‘Monuments of the Literature of Ancient Russia’ undertaken by
the Department of Ancient Russian Literature of Pushkin House is not yet able to
satisfy the growing demands of the readers due to the small circulation. That is why
the publishing house ‘Science’ is preparing a twenty-volume edition of ‘Monuments’ with
two hundred thousand copies. We have yet to learn and comprehend all the greatness of
ancient Russian literature.

What makes the publication of the book of George Fedotov valuable for us ? It introduces us
to the special and almost forgotten world of Old Russian holiness. Moral principle has
always been necessary in public life. Morality is ultimately one for all ages and for all
people. Honesty, conscientiousness in work, love for the Motherland, contempt for material
goods and at the same time concern for the social economy, love of mind, social activity —
all this is taught to us by living.

Reading old literature, we must remember that the old does not become obsolete if we apply it
with an amendment for a while, for other social conditions. The historian's view should never
leave us, otherwise we will understand nothing in culture and deprive ourselves of the greatest
values that inspired our ancestors.

The Russian literary critic Benedikt Sarnov considered G P Fedotov to be “the smartest and finest Russian thinker of the 20th century”.

Sergei Ryapolov wrote :

Georgiy Fedotov is a complex and at first glance very controversial personality,
philosopher-publicist, and author of a large number of essays, articles, essays
about Russian history and culture. He saw the realisation of the social ideal
about the ways of Christian socialism. He was also an ideological opponent of
the Bolshevik transformations in our country, and carried out criticism of the
Soviet socialist model. I will say at once that not everything that Georgi Petrovich
claimed can and should be agreed with. I think that from the point of view of modern
Russian conservatism, Fedotov's philosophy is a vast field for analysis and
critical note. But in the meantime, if we leave ideological issues aside, we
cannot but agree that in many ways we are dealing with an outstanding personality
and a very special Russian thinker. As the historian of Russian philosophy
A F Zamaleev notes in the work ‘Hearing the Voice of Christ and the Voice of History
(On the Social Philosophy of G P Fedotov)’, Russian revolutionary emigration was
initially divided into various factions and directions. This included an
anti-communism, represented mainly by successive monarchists from among intellectuals
and officers. At first, it was sympathetically treated but not identified with any of
the philosophers N A Berdyaev, I A Ilyin, S L Frank, and the philosophy of change.
This philosophy was named after the collection ‘Change of Milestones’ released in 1921
in Prague, and the religious-philosophical current of Eurasianism, and it tried
to make a reconcilation with the ‘October Revolution’ and more. In this dissenting
voice of the ideological ferment in Russian emigration, writes Zamaleev, is found the
ground and a kind of cultural messianism. Not hiding their anti-Bolshevik beliefs,
they nevertheless openly professed socialism, bringing it closer to the Christian
revelation. One of the main ideologues of this movement was the brilliant philosopher
and publicist among the Russians abroad, Georgiy Fedotov.

M V Pechnikov summarised about Professor Fedotov :

 Both in his historical works and in publicism, G P Fedotov did a lot for the knowledge 
 of Russia, for fostering a spiritually sober view of it, devoid, on the one hand, of 
 flattering self-deception and national pride, on the other, of national self-abasement 
 and disbelief in the future of the country.  Often, as it seemed to the nationalists, 
 he attacked Russia and the Russian people too harshly.  But, according to the just 
 remark of a friend of Fedotov, the poet Yu P Ivask, 'these, his philippics are jeremiads. 
 Jeremiah and other Old Testament prophets severely denounced Israel out of love for Israel. 
 So Fedotov denounced Russia, loving her'.  It seems that the definition of the historian 
 as 'a prophet looking to the past' (F Schlegel) is fully applicable to him.  The historicism 
 of thinking preached by G P Fedotov with all his creativity was reflected in his favorite 
 thought, that 'the face of Russia cannot be revealed in one generation, contemporary to us. 
 It is in the living connection of all outdated genera, like a musical melody in the alternation 
 of dying sounds”.  To pick up this 'melody' of Russian culture, to develop, harmonise, enrich, 
 while keeping the main theme is the task of the present and future generations, and Fedotov's 
 works will undoubtedly contribute to this.

Although Professor George Petrovich Fedotov seems to be becoming steadily better known in his homeland, it does not seem that there has been a similar development beyond the Russian borders. It may be emphasised that this is sadly the case despite the fact that Professor Fedotov took the trouble to write his major work in English at a time which was near the end of his earthly days. The work of Professor Fedotov is not valuable simply because of the focus on Russia. Since Rus' and Russia (and Ukraine and Belarus) have the same source in Constantinople, and since, despite the differences in language and culture of the various Orthodox lands, the Orthodox Christian way of life is quite similar. What is revealed by the studies of Professor Fedotov can help us understand more about all the other Orthodox Christian cultures.

In the web-site history article about Saint Vladimir's Seminary, there was first a recollection that the Dean, Father Georges Florovsky, in contrast with Professor George Fedotov was "a restless, impatient man, quick to respond, correct, and rebuke". Professor George Fedotov was remembered in this manner :

 In contrast to our Dean, George Fedotov was a soft-voiced, gentle man who held firm views and 
 expressed them clearly.  He was never agitated in class or at any public meeting I attended.  He kept 
 his charming smile even when he was under attack.  Like Fr. Florovsky, he was well known and appreciated 
 in the Columbia community, but Fedotov was the one who was characterised by some Union teachers as 
 'walking Russian spirituality'.  I will never forget him greeting me with the triple kiss on Broadway 
 during Bright Week in 1950'.

Writings

A full bibliography of his works was published in Paris by the wife of Professor G P Fedotov in 1956.

• “Treasury of Russian Spirituality” (London, Sheed & Ward, 1999). ISBN 10 : 0722092148. ISBN 13 : 978-0722092149.

• “Collected Works”, 12 vols. (Moscow : SAM & SAM, 1996-2014) [online, available for download]

• “The Russian Religious Mind : Kievan Christianity the Tenth to the Thirteenth Centuries” (New York : Harper, 1946).

• “Saints of Ancient Russia” (St Petersburg : Satis, 2004) (in Russian) (description of the book in English)

• “Saint Philipp, Metropolitan of Russia” (Paris : YMCA Press, 1926)

• “Peter Abelard” (St Petersburg : Publishing House Brokhauz-Efron, 1924)

• ‘Vladimir Solovyev's Lectures on Godmanhood’ in “The Journal of Philosophy”, vol. 42, no. 12 (June, 1945), pp. 334-335.

• ‘Genevieve and Saint Simeon Stylites’ in “Alpha and Omega”, no. 4 (1996), p. 11.

• “Martin of Tours : ascetic Devotee”

• “Struggle for Art”

• “Feldwebel : in Boileau”

• “Lazarus of the Four Days”

• “Saint Petersburg : 22 April (5 May), 1918”

• “Life and Patience of Saint Abraham of Smolensk”

• “Glorification of Saint Vladimir”

• “Pierre Paschal : Avvakum”

• “The Fate and Sins of Russia”

• “About Virgil”

• “Spiritual Poems”

• “Slavonic or Russian Language in Worship”

• “The Psalms translated by G P Fedotov”

• “The Six Psalms in a new Translation”

• “What is Socialism ?”

• “Young England”

• “Failed Protection”

• “About Death, Culture and Numbers”

• “Orthodox Nihilism or Orthodox Culture”

• “The religious Path of Péguy”

• “Russian Church and Clergy”

• “Fate of a rotten Concept”

• “Third Clermont Congress”

• “Anglo-Russian Congress of Youth in Hai-Lee”

• “National and Universal”

• “Oxford”

• “After Oxford”

• “Carmen Saeculare”

• “Ecce Homo”

• “Berdyaev : The Thinker”

• “In Defence of Ethics”

• “V Rozanov : Fallen Leaves”

• “About Modern Theological Controversies”

• “Love and Sociology”

• “About Freedom”

• “About the Freedom of Formal and Real”

• “About the Holy Spirit in Nature and Culture”

• “About the Style of the Homily”

• “About the Antichrist”

• “Basics of Christian Democracy”

• “Letters of Blessed Augustine”

• “Orthodoxy and Historical Criticism”

• “Р Varéry : Views of the contemporary World”

• “The Social Significance of Christianity”

• “Tragedy of the Intelligentsia”

• “Christianity in the Face of Modern Social Reality”

• “The Church and Social Truth”

• “Eschatology and Culture”

• “Stalinocracy”

Writings by various authors about George P Fedotov

• Antoshchenko, A V, “The Concept of the Old Russian Holiness of G P Fedotov” (Karelia : Petrozavodsk State University research article, 2013).

-……"‘Eurasia’" or "‘Holy Russia’" ? Russian Emigrants in Search of Self-awareness on the Paths of History” (Dissertation, Petrozavodsk, 2003).

-……“On the religious Foundations of G P Fedotov's Historiosophy” at the Scientific Conference “Makariev Readings” held at the Gorno-Altai State University, Gorno-Altaisk, Altai Republic, Russia, 2004, pp. 216-226.

-……‘Student Years of G P Fedotov’ in “General History and cultural History” (St Petersburg, 2008), pp. 157-168.

-…… ‘The Tragedy of Love (G P Fedotov's Path to History)’ in “The World of the Historian”, vol. 4 (Omsk, 2004), pp. 50-75.

-……‘Long Gatherings in Saratov’ in “Historiographic Collection”, vol. 23 (Saratov, 2008), pp. 72-82.

-……‘When you love, then you understand Everything (preface to publication)’ in “Dialogue with Time”, vol. 37 (Moscow, 2011), pp. 297-308.

-……“The Conflict between G P Fedotov and the Board of the St Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris” (1939).

• Bychkov, S S, “For the Sake of Truth, I will not regret either the foreign or the Russian Church” (The conflict in the St Sergius Theological Institute in the correspondence of G P Fedotov (1939) in “Historical Archive, 2003” : no. 1, pp. 73-86 ; no. 3, pp. 63-87 ; no. 4, pp. 73-116.

• Dobrokhotov Alexander Lvovich, Nevolin Sergey Borisovich, Filonova Lyudmila Georgievna, comps., “Russian Philosophers (late XIX - Mid XX Century) : Biographical dictionary, bibliography, essays” (Moscow : Book Chamber, 1993). Reference to G P Fedotov pp. 79-80.

• Fedotov, Konstantin, web-site dedicated to G P Fedotov (1886-1951).

• Gaman, L A, ‘Soviet History in the Image of G P Fedotov : on the Posing of the Question’ in “Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University”, vol. 308 (2005) issue 3.

• Georgy_Fedotov family community invitation to visit the web-site dedicated to George Petrovich Fedotov (1886-1951).

• Ivask, Yu P, ‘G P Fedotov (1886–1951)’ in “Experiments Magazine”, no. 6 (New York, 1956).

• Karpovich, M M, ‘G P Fedotov’ in “New Journal”, no. 27 (New York, 1951).

• Klepikova, J V, ‘The Burden of the Empire and the Vocation of Russia : George Fedotov’s Philosophy of History’ in “Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences”, vol. 62, no. 4 (2019), pp. 44-57.

• Potekhina, I P, ‘Fedotov, Georgy Petrovich’ in “Biography of St Petersburg State University”.

• Serbinenko, V V, ‘Justification of Culture : the creative Choice of G Fedotov’ in “Questions of Philosophy”, no. 8 (1991).

• Stepun, F A, ‘G P Fedotov’ in “New Journal”, no. 49 (1957).

• Zaitseva, N V, “The Logic of Love : Russia in G Fedotov's historiosophical Concept”.

References

Mitrofanova, Ekaterina Borisanova ; Konstantin Borisovich Fedotov, “G P Fedotov : The Life of a Russian Philosopher and his Family” (Ridero Russian EBooks Publishing, 2019). ASIN : B07KXSSFVZ. (in Russian)

Prokurat, Michael ; Golitzin, Alexander & Petersen, Michael, eds., “The A to Z of the Orthodox Church” (Lanham, MD : Scarecrow Press, 2010), pp. 322-323. ISBN : 978-0-8108-7602-6.

Wikipedia article about Georgy Fedotov

Russian Wikipedia biography

Chronos Biographical Pointer biography

ABC of Faith biography

Russian Academic Dictionary biography

Additional information :

Schmemann, Archpriest Alexander, 'Book Review - The Russian Religious Mind, Vol II' in "Saint Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly" (1966), Vol. 10, no. 4, p. 213.

JSTOR digital library reference to the works of G P Fedotov

Fellow of the J S Guggenheim Memorial Foundation (1946)

YMCA silent films from 1920s-1930s about the Institut Saint-Serge de Paris, and the RSCM Summer Camp (posted by John Sanidopoulos)

"New York Times" obituary

Death record

Findagrave record

Pechnikov, M V, “Georgi Fedotov as a Historian of ancient Russian Spiritual Culture” (in English)

"Georgi Fedotov as a Historian of ancient Russian Spiritual Culture" (in Russian)

“Fedotov Georgy Petrovich (pseudonym E Bogdanov) (1/13 October, 1886, Saratov-1 September, 1951 USA)” (in English)

“Fedotov Georgy Petrovich (pseudonym E Bogdanov) (1/13 October, 1886, Saratov-1 September, 1951 USA)” (in Russian)

“Fedotov Georgi Petrovich (1886-1951) : about the man, the quotes, audio articles” (in English)

“Fedotov Georgi Petrovich (1886-1951) : about the man, the quotes, audio articles” (in Russian)