CONCLUSIONS
1. There is not a single reason for the assertion that at any time there existed a separate ethnical group of „Eastern European tribes". In its place there exists enough evidence to prove that at the beginning of the first millennium, A.
D., there began to distinguish.itself a group of Ukrainian tribes, known in those times by other peoples, under the name of Antes.2. Today there is no doubt whatsυver that this sovereign organization of Antes which existed two hundred and fifty years, was the first known sovereign union of Ukrainian tribes. This union waged war with Byzantium, the Goths and the Avars, and excelled not only in the courage of its warriors, but also in military affairs, and the originality of its organization of community life. At the end of its existence, the Antes State disintegrated into smaller states and tribal unions.
3. It has also been ascertained that a completely different Slavonic tribal union, known in time, under the name of „Vyatichi11 appeared on the open spaces of Eastern Europe, much later after the Antes and were forced to settle on poorer soil (in the upper reaches of the Oka and between the Oka and Volga) because the better lands were already occupied by the Antes-Ukrainian tribes. From these Slavs, after their mixing with the much more numerous but weaker autochthonous Finno- Turkic tribes, emerged the Moscovite nation, which in the eighteenth century began to be known under the inaccurate name of „Russian".
4. In the meantime, the Varangian (from the tribe „Rus") dynasty took advantage of the extraordinary ethnical closeness and community of economic interests of the Ukrainian Slavonic tribal unions which survived after the downfall of the Antes State, to create on the foundations of post-Antes traditions — in turn a second Ukrainian State. This state began to be called „Rus“.
The Varangian dynasty in its third generation became completely Slavonic (Ukrainianized) and governed this State with the support of the native, ethnically speaking, Ukrainian elite.5. Moscovite, or more accurately speaking Mosco-Finnish, tribes, based on a thorough analysis of chronicles and other historical sources, took no part either in the creation, nor the economic, political or religious life of this, second in turn, Ukrainian State, whose capital was Kyjiw, which in the period of its glory, because of its territorial size and its varied ethnical composition could rightfully be called an Empire.
6. About the inclusion (even if conditional) of the Mosco- Finnish tribes in the Ukrainian princely Kyjiwan State, known under the name of „Rus“, in the course of the first centuries of its existence, is out of the question. On the contrary, there is no doubt, during that period, the Kyjiwan State was forced to subdue always anew those tribes up to six times (the sixthtime at the end of the first hundred years) and they would break away again,
7. The compulsory inclusion of the Mosco-FiTmish tribes to the Kyjiwan Ukrainian Empire, known as „Rus" in the second century of its existence was quite conventional and formal, because in the first quarter of the twelfth century, Wolodymyr Monomach was forced to set out twice to pacify these tribes who still retained in those times their native princelings who unwillingly,submitted to the princes of the Kyjiwan dynasty who governed those lands from Rostov. Moscovite ancestors began to accept Christianity with great resistance (the uprising of 1024) only at the beginning of the third century of the existence of the Kyjiwan State. There are no facts about the participation of these tribes in the life of the Kyjiwan State, but it is known that to reach Rostov from Kyjiw one had to pass through Novhorod and from Rostov to the lands of the Vyatychi along the Oka was still a dangerous road. Prince AVolodymyr recalls that among his accomplished feats only once in the course of о life filled with many journeys was he able to reach Rostov, not through Novhorod, but „through the Vyatichi".
8. In the middle of the third century of its existence the second Ukrainian (,,Rus“) State began to weaken, whereas at the same time the Suzdal and other Moscovite princedoms began to grow strong, though still owing allegiance to Kyiw and governed by princes of the Kyjiwan dynasty (which became naturalized there already). At the end of the third century of the existence of the Kyjiwan princely State, they grew in strength and attempted to win Kyjiw and maintain themselves there. Later under the leadership of the Suzdal prince they conquered, ruined and looted Kyjiw. Part of the inhabitants were killed and part were taken into captivity.
9. Under the incessant attacks of the Asian nomadic tribes, and in time by the Mosco-Finnish, Kyjiw weakened and the Ukrainian government center shifted westward into Wolyn and Halychyna. This, the third in turn, Ukrainian State, the Ha- Iycho-Wolynian, was a continuation of the Kyjiwan State. It existed to the middle of the fourteenth century. Thus, the ethnical group of Slavonic Ukrainian tribes lived a sovereign life without interruption in the existence of the second and third Ukrainian State for four hundred and seventy years.
10. In the life and trials of the Halycho-Wolynian State, of course, the Mosco-Finnish lands took no part and there is no mention at all about events in the later years of the existence of the Halycho-Wolynian State in the Suzdal Chronicle.
11. Just as the Kyjiwan princedom (Ukrainian State) and its rulers, so the Halycho-Wolynian, were related by economic, political and dynastic ties with Western Europe and Byzantium, and their culture developed on Greco-Roman principles. The Moscovite tribe, and in time the Moscovite princes were related economically and culturally (and in Tartar times —- also dynamically) with the East.
12. The presently existing group of Eastern European languages arose not in prehistoric times on an ethnical foundation, but alike the Romanic language group was the creation of later times. They began to develop only in the second millenium A. D. under the motivating influences that were religious, political and cultural, whereas „the Solunian[§§§§§§] dialect” of the ancient Bulgarian language was used as the Church language and the princely language in the Kyjiwan Empire, playing the part of the Latin language in this process.
Therefore there is no reason in the least to acknowledge the proof of a close relationship of Moscovite and Ukrainian nations because of the existence of a group Eastern-Slavonic languages.
Likewise, we cannot take under consideration the name „Russian" which the Moscovites use today, because they have no valid right to it, but introduced it legally into life only in 1713 as a political move. Up to that time, the Moscovites themselves called their state the „Moscovite Czard om” or „Moscovite State” and referred to themselves as,,Moscovite people”.