There are a number of points here - perhaps most importantly that no-one in the UK could possibly regard Land of Hope And Glory seriously - it is basically treated as a piece of ironic kitsch and confined to an indescribable musical event called The Last Night of the Proms. I think that most people would regard "Jerusalem", based on the introduction to a long poem by William Blake, as the "English" anthem - and Blake's readers will be aware that it is actually much more.
However, LOHAG has to be understood in its historical context - it is intensely of its time (1902). At the turn of the 20th century there was enormous debate as to the future path of the British Empire. Some thinkers foresaw it as the nucleus of a multi-national (and multi-racial) world federation of independent states sharing the traditions of common law and democracy. Others understood it in a purely nationalistic way, with a special emphasis on the wealth and glory overseas rule bought, a triumphalism particularly obvious in 1897, at Queen Victoria's Jubilee..
This latter, "materialist" model of the Empire was criticised by Kipling in his great poem "Recessional", which enjoyed enormous popularity -
http://www.web-books.com/Classics/Poetry/Anthology/Kipling/Recessional.htm
The outbreak of the Boer war seemed to confirm such fears. There was very considerable domestic and international opposition to what was widely understood as a war for gold and diamonds, not for "civilisation". In fairness, had the Boers been black, few of the critics at home or abroad would have had the slightest objection to the conflict - but that is how things were.
LOHAG was written in the immediate wake of the Boer War. In many ways it reflects the model of imperialism associated with Cecil Rhodes - ever-widening Empire, commercial prosperity (and ideally a union with the United States). This famous
Punch cartoon shows Rhodes as the Collosus of Africa, and suggests the ethos -
http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...channel=s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N
The second verse seems to directly refer to critics of the Boer war and the "materialist" Imperial project -
Thy fame is ancient as the days,
As Ocean large and wide
- in Rhodesian terms the ocean is often a symbol for transatlantic unity as well as British trade and seapower .
A pride that dares, and heeds not praise,
A stern and silent pride
- that is, an Imperial pride which does not bend to flattery (or criticism, of which there had been much).
Not that false joy that dreams content
With what our sires have won;
- nor an attitude that regards the age of conquest and expansion as over.
The blood a hero sire hath spent
Still nerves a hero son.
That is, the age of heroic conquest is still here, and "we" are still as ready to conquer and dare as our ancestors. We might even identify the "sons" with the emerging British Dominions and the United States. Some at the time most certainly did.
After 1914-18 this sort of stuff rang pretty hollow. I have never ever heard the second verse sung, nor the song sung in any but ironic circumstances. Me - I'm for this -
http://www.progressiveliving.org/william_blake_poetry_jerusalem.htm
Cheers, Ian
