The Eastern question

Continuation:  The distinction of my previous post makes clearer the essential characteristics of each nationalism, which we see to be very much a product of the people as well as the state, which are ineffably linked:  though the Crimean War was definitely motivated out of state-interest, it drew huge attention to the popular side of nationalism:  the people-concern.

Observation:  The Crimean War is the end of land-power.  My feeling about the Crimean War and its status as the so-called wake-up call for Russia is that everyone kinda assumed that because Russia was hella big (half a continent) it was powerful; throughout the medieval period and even continuing into the Renaissance, land indicated strength in its correlation to resources and the ability of the government to collect revenue.  The crushing of Russia by a small island (to be repeated in the Russo-Japanese War in the early 1900s) proved this assumption wrong.  Following its defeat, Russia (essentially admitting its mistake) emancipated the serfs, making land no longer a power-source and bringing Russia into the nineteenth century.