Why do so many historians continue to refer to refer to countries as "she"/"her", given this usage has long fallen out of use in speech and most other kinds of writing?

by acidtoyman

This isn't meant to be a political question—people have been calling countries "it" since long before feminism was a thing. Calling a country "she" in most contexts would draw attention to itself as an odd affectation—it certainly wouldn't go unnoticed. I've been binging history books over the last couple years, and this usage, even in recent books, always jumps out at me.

(Before someone starts making some comment about it being a relic of Anglo-Saxon having had gendered nouns, the Anglo-Saxon land was of neuter gender, not feminine; this argument is often brought up to "explain" ships being called "her", when the Anglo-Saxon sċip was also actually neuter.)

EDIT: Some more examples form books I've read recently:

A Concise History of Germany by Mary Fulbrook (2019):

  • "... regularising Germany's relations with her western neighbours ..."
  • "... by which Germany was to increase her navy to one-third the strength of the British navy ..."

Battle Cry of Freedom by James M. McPherson (1988):

  • "... warned that the South might secede if her rights were not protected."
  • "... settlement of the Texas boundary dispute in favor of New Mexico with compensation to Texas of $10 million to fund her pre-statehood debt."

A People's History of the German Revolution by William A. Pelz (2018):

  • "Bavaria shared her Catholic faith and much of her foreign policy with the Austrian Empire ..."
  • "... he wrote bitterly in his diary about England and her allies ..."

1848 by Mike Rapport (2010):

  • "France would also not hesitate to protect her neighbours - specifically Switzerland and Italy - in their own attempts to democratise or to unite ..."

Iron Kingdom by Christopher Clark (2007):

  • "The interests of the monarchy thus demanded that Vienna abandon her unreliable British ally and sue instead for the friendship of France."
  • "... massive Habsburg acquisitions in the Balkans would give Austria the upper hand over her Prussian rival."

Crucible of War: The Seven Years' War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754–1766 by Fred Anderson (2001)

  • "... Pitt’s strategic vision still focused on attacking France’s imperial periphery rather than her armies in Europe ..."
  • "... Pitt’s evident determination to strip France of her empire, humble her diplomatically, and in effect dictate the peace terms ..."
OldPersonName

What are some specific examples from books? What specific books and authors? Are they written in English (or maybe translated to English?) I have a range of books on ancient history from Sumer through the Roman empire and I don't believe a single one does this. I would find it pretty odd in any kind of serious work. I'm curious where you're seeing it (especially frequently, and in recent books).

The best I can do in the meantime is this discussion from u/Noble_Devil_Boruta on the use of terms like mother and fatherland, but that's a different thing from what you're describing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/c2tr34/why_were_germany_and_russia_known_as_the/

EquivalentInflation

If you could provide specific examples of this, I might be able to answer better, but from my own experience, it tends to be because a country is viewed as a "motherland" (with fatherlands being referred to as "he"). There's a human tendency to try to anthropomorphize big and abstract things so that we relate better to them, so narrative approaches to history will seek (consciously or not) to make a nation feel like a person.

As for why nations pick a mother or father to represent them, that's a bit of a trickier topic. Obviously, there's the parental role (looking after citizens, raising them, asking citizens to look after them in return), and it's often split based on more "traditional" parental roles: "motherland" is used to evoke feelings of compassion, caring for its citizens like children, while "fatherland" is often more strict, often militaristic.