
George Bridges on the part played by his great-grandfather, Robert Bridges, in the composition of Parry’s music to Blake’s lyric: too precious, he says, to be hijacked by separatists
I suspect you had better things to do last Friday evening than stay in to watch the English Democrats’ party political broadcast. I missed it. In fact, I didn’t know the party existed until I was throwing out the newspapers at the weekend, and happened to see the broadcast listed on the TV page. Intrigued, I looked them up online. ‘England: we have a right to be angry. THE ENGLISH HAVE HAD ENOUGH.’ I began to feel as if I had just hitched a ride with White Van Man, raging on about Gordon! Ken! Tax! Immigration! Europe! Everything in capitals, with lots of !!!!!s. And then I read this: ‘It’s time for England to have her own anthem. In fact it is long overdue. “Jerusalem” has consistently been voted the nation’s favourite and that will do for me.’
Well, English Democrats are not alone in their love of ‘Jerusalem’. It is Gordon Brown’s favourite hymn too. No doubt he has it on his iPod. Maybe singing about dark satanic mills appeals to his brooding, fingernail-biting inner self. Well, I agree with Gordon (four words I thought I would never write) but should ‘Jerusalem’ be Engerlund’s anthem? No. ‘Jerusalem’ is not a hymn for England, still less the Little Englanders. The story of its creation begins a year after the outbreak of the first world war with — suitably enough — a letter to the Daily Telegraph. On 4 August 1915, Sir Francis Younghusband, explorer, invader of Tibet (best not to be dwelt on today) and man of imperial derring-do, wrote to the paper that the war was ‘a spiritual conflict — a holy war — the Fight for Right’.

Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in