>>2074816
A nation can exist without a state that is super normal, and nation state as in ethnostates like you and the other trannies in this retarded debate seem to suggest never actually existed as a nation states weren;t pure monoethnic.
>the "purge" you're imagining was a series of wars wherein William forced the various lords of the British Isles to submit to his authority.
The harrying of the north was a genocide look at pic rel for better view of how this was an actual genocide and ethnic cleansing campaign and not just a power succession. Compared to the anglosaxon power squabbles things like this did not occur between themselves.
> But there was no nation of England.
YES THERE WAS AS EARLY AS KING ALFRED THE GREAT WHO REFERED TO THE ANGLECYNN, which is the english.
The normans didnt mix they took over and the class system even to the modern day reflects that with the upper class english largely deriving their ethnicity from normans.
>There was a Mafia Boss
You can say that about any organized structure, you can say that about your local school, your government, your municipality, your local charity, your local church etc and etc.
The reason the mafia was so different and made them the mafia was exactly because of the organization. Any organized endeavour can be called a mafia by your definition.
>The political entities which you erroneously believe to be modeled after our own were in fact nothing more than collections of lands held as literal personal property of a lord.
Majority of whom considered each other part of a nation if they were of the same ethnicity, there is a reason why all chronicles make note of a nobles origins, now there were plenty of nobles who lived under a king with a different ethnicity due to military and other economic reasons but does not mean they saw themselves as part of that kings nation but just his kingdom.
Lots of nations were divided between kingdoms, ie the english were divided under the heptarchy but they all were english