I am little confused by concept of modern nationalism. It is

states began to be viewed as a brotherly unit instead of families that where put together because rich kings were fighting over borders

>>1842302
But there was patriotism before age nationalism.
Romans viewed fellow Romans as same, not as barbarians, Jean d'Arc fought for french king and france etc.

>>1842311
nationalism is an idea from the Enlightenment.

>>1842361
What was the deal with Jean d'Arc then? Was she paid by the king or something?

>>1842361
How is "Kungar people good. Mungar people bad. Let go kill Mungar!" an enlightenment idea?

>>1842398
Religious nuttery + divine right of kings.

>>1842486
Kungars aren't tens of thousands of people that have never met each other.

>>1842280
Nationalism was boosted by the French revolution, but love for one's country and feelings of membership to one nation already existed before that

Don't believe to retards who'll tell you now one felt French/British/Spanish/Russia...etc before the 19th century

>>1842280
More people became literate, its not a coincidence that most European countries have their own distinct language and those that don't like Germany and Austria will try to annex each other

>>1842280
>It is accepted that nationlism began in few hundred years ago
That's been accepted by certain Western countries that didn't exist before that.

>>1842486
The enlightenment idea of nationalism is that the nation (defined mostly by identity, ethnicity and language) is the subject of sovereignity and can create its own state.


>>1842311
There was no French nation at the time. Most of the French king's subjects didn't speak French language, but a variety of related Romance languages. At the same time, some of the English king's subjects spoke French.
People were mostly united by the person of the sovereign, rather than their identity.

>>1842311
they were united by the king, not their ethnic background.