Dostoevskii took much from the slavophils, and especially from Kirěevskii. After his manner, Dostoevskii may be said to have positively provided a new foundation for slavophilism, through the intermediation of the počveniki (Grigor'ev).
Philosophically Solov'ev, despite his subsequent opposition to the doctrine, may be considered to have carried a stage further the religious philosophy of slavophilism.
Among the most recent philosophers of religion, the influence of Dostoevskii and Solov'ev can be plainly traced side by side with that of Homjakov and Kirěevskii. These two founders of the doctrine are again and again referred to (Geršenzon, Berdjaev, etc.), and we are told that the slavophils did good service in that they duly esteemed the importance of religion, even though their position inclined too much towards the right.
Exponents of official theology were but little inclined to think well of Kirěevskii or Homjakov, their disapproval having other and obvious causes besides Homjakov's strong censures upon official theology (for example, upon Makarii's book). None the less a few theologians were early found to regard slavophil teaching with respect. Of late a more progressive tendency has been noteworthy in theology, led by Antonii in Volhynia and by his pupil Sergii in Finland. In this development the influence of slavophilism, together with that of Dostoevskii, is well marked.
