Chinese writer and social critic Yu Jie once wrote: “Promoting nationalism requires an 'enemy' to be identified.” Prof Ainslie Embree has similarly observed: “Perhaps every nationalism needs an enemy.” For Scottish nationalism, England has traditionally filled that particular purpose.

The 1320 Declaration of Arbroath defined Scottish independence as the absence of “English rule”. Olive Checkland wrote of 19th Century Scotland that “inevitably Scottish nationalism assumed an anti-English aspect,” explaining one important aspect of nationalism as “an assertion of difference from a dominant people”. George Orwell observed in 1945 that Celtic nationalisms “are alike in their anti-English orientation”. And more recently, Dietmar Böhnke wrote of Scots nationalism being strengthened by “the image of the Scottish nation fighting as one man against bad odds and opposing an external enemy, which are the English ‘colonisers’, the ‘Auld Enemy’”.

It is from the perception of the English as “a dominant people” that anti-Englishness arises. There is no anti-Welsh or anti-Ulster element within Scots nationalism. Only the English, for reasons of population, culture and/or attitude, are thought of as colonisers or an ‘enemy’.

But is anti-Englishness now largely a historical artefact? Has modern nationalism outgrown the “England expects...” rhetoric of the 1970s, which in attributing viciously anti-Scottish and exploitative motives to the English ‘other’ betrayed its own underlying prejudices and motives?

Yes and no. It is the case that, in Alex Salmond’s words, the SNP took a “conscious decision” to “project” independence in an “inclusive way”. A notable milestone in that regard was his plea in a 1998 conference speech for party members no longer to “blame the English”. Another significant moment was Winnie Ewing’s attempt, at the 2003 Bannockburn rally, to effect a paradigm shift. Actually, she told the party faithful, “the enemies of Scotland are not the English”. In the new, civic SNP the unionist parties were to be the “traitors” and the target for nationalistic enmity.

Yet even amongst senior nationalists, the attempts to purge the public anti-Englishness which has sullied the SNP’s reputation haven’t always been effective. Former SNP leader Gordon Wilson claimed in 2003 that Britain is a “state run by England for the benefit of England,” and SNP veteran Ian Hamilton declared only last year that “Scotland has suffered under English government”.

So anti-Englishness is very much alive and kicking. Prof Miller’s and Dr Hussain’s 2006 study found that some 46 percent of nationalists have a “negative” view of English people. Nationalism, they confirmed, makes people “more Anglophobic” — at “street level” if not among the SNP leadership.

It’s a serious issue. Anti-English violence is thankfully rare, but for every loose-lipped councillor who accidentally tells a newspaper reporter that he thinks the English are “bloody arrogant”, there must be numerous others who would never dream of damaging the party by speaking their minds.

Sometimes the civic mantra is so firmly rooted that one has to read carefully between the lines to discern the underlying attitude. Take, for example, Alex Salmond’s reaction to the earth-shattering news that haggis may first have been eaten in England and only later popularised by Scots.

“I don’t mind the English claiming haggis as their own, as long as they leave us our country. But haggis is our institution and we will defend it to the last. This haggis grab is akin to a land grab and it’s a sign of its culinary success now as a swanky dish.” [my bold]

Why would Salmond associate a rather trivial piece of culinary history with a “land grab” and an unwarranted political threat by “the English” on “our country”? Would he have reacted so peculiarly had haggis happened to have originated in Wales or Ireland? The answer is obvious.

Such divisive comments also risk intensifying anti-English sentiment. Not that he’ll lose any sleep over that; in 2006 Alex Salmond actually expressed approval of cross-border resentment.

“In England, people quite rightly resent Scottish Labour MPs bossing them about on English domestic legislation.” [my bold]

Imagine the outcry if that had been the other way around: an approval of Scottish resentment of English “bossing”. But Salmond is smart; he would never damage the party by speaking his mind!

Hat-tip: O’Neill.