Did nationalism predate nation states?

Nationalism is aggressive and developed by militarised nation states

Question: Did nationalism predate nation states?
Position‹2 of 3›: No, nationalism did not predate nation states.
Argument1 of 3›: Nationalism is aggressive and developed by militarised nation states

Nationalism is focused on defending one specific race or cultural group, so modern nationalism is developed on a large scale by modern nation states which are placed in opposition to other states.

The argument

Modern nationalism exists in order to support nation states and their existence by defending them, often aggressively and by using military force, against individual outsiders or other nation states. Put that way, nationalism is not a sentiment that happens to find a political home but something with a function, and the function is to sustain a particular kind of state. A feeling that exists in order to do a job is one that arises alongside the job. The historical sequence is offered as the evidence. Historically, such as during World War II, nationalist feeling - tipping over into racism - acted as a driver for large-scale militarisation, supplying both the willingness to be mobilised and the distinction between those worth defending and those to be defended against. But now these large armies exist in precedent, they drive continued nationalism by behaving aggressively to those outside the nation state. The relationship therefore runs in both directions over time: the sentiment produced the institutions, and the institutions now reproduce the sentiment. That second half is what makes this more than a claim about origins. A standing army is a permanent statement that there is someone to be defended against, so a population living with the institution is continually supplied with the outlook the institution requires. These national armies, and the idea they represent of a nation state needing to defend itself against those who do not belong, suggest that nationalism is developed by the structure of modern nation states, which exist in opposition to others. If the sentiment is generated by structures that are themselves modern, then nationalism and its aggressive tendencies are not organic.

Context

Aggression: the action of attacking without provocation.

Premises

[P1]Modern nationalism exists to defend nation states, often aggressively and militarily, against outsiders and rival states. [P2] Historically nationalist feeling drove large-scale militarisation, as in World War II, and now that these standing armies exist they in turn perpetuate aggressive nationalism, showing nationalism is generated by the structure of nation states rather than being organic. [C] Because nationalism is manufactured by militarised nation states defining themselves against others, nationalism did not predate nation states.

Counter-arguments

Instances of aggressive nationalism have been evident throughout history, such as in the Greco-Persian wars, and suggesting that nationalism itself only exists as a result of modern nation states is disingenuous, even though modern nation states do encourage a new form of large-scale aggressive nationalism in terms of mechanised warfare.

Rejecting the premises

1. Instances of aggressive nationalism can be seen throughout history. 2. On some level, all different groups and nations exist in opposition to each other. 3. Nationalism has always existed and has always been aggressive.

Framing

Aggressive nationalism benefits those in power, because it allows them to maintain their power through encouraging citizens to defend their state, whether for a real or imagined reason.