摘要
本文介紹了關於比較歷史的爭論和比較歷史學的貢獻。史學有兩個相關的定義：歷史的書寫和歷史書寫史的研究。這兩個方面都是歷史學家提供的領域的主題，他們的領域從古代到現在，從地中海到東南太平洋。歷史研究中使用的假設，研究歷史與其他學科之間的關係，以及運用社會科學和文學理論的方法來解釋歷史來源。比較歷史起源於十八世紀。他是啟蒙運動的知識份子一個重要特長，只要人們研究過社會生活，人們就會反復著迷於將兩個或兩個以上時代或地方的歷史模式並列起來。這種吸引力的一部分來自於為了研究社會變遷而審視歷史軌跡的普遍效用。事實上，從托克維爾（Tocqueville）和韋伯（Max Weber）布洛赫（Marc Bloch）、本迪克斯（Reinhard Bendix）等比較歷史實踐者，普遍對了解社會動態以及文化和社會結構的時代變革感興趣。對歷史序列的關注對於這樣的理解是必不可少的。並非所有關於社會變革的調查都使用不同歷史的明確並列。因此，我們可能想知道：是什麼促使我們使用比較，而不是專注於單一的歷史軌跡，通過比較歷史的具體模式，我們追求什麼樣的目的，以及如何實現這些目的。歷史學家通常進行比較。但並非所有的歷史都是比較歷史。比較歷史學家的不同之處在於，他們或多或少明確地將比較作為一種傳統的社會科學方法。
並列摘要
This article introduces the debate on comparative history and the contribution of comparative history. Historiography has two related definitions: the writing of history and the study of historical writing history. These two aspects are the themes of the fields provided by historians from ancient times to the present, from the Mediterranean to the Southeast Pacific. The assumptions used in historical research, the relationship between history and other disciplines, and the use of social science and literary theory to explain the source of history. Comparative history originated in the eighteenth century. He was an important intellectual specialty of the enlightenment movement. As long as people studied social life, people would repeatedly be obsessed with juxtaposing the historical models of two or more times or places. Part of this attraction comes from the universal utility of examining the historical trajectory in order to study social change. In fact, practitioners of comparative history such as Tocqueville, Max Weber, Marc Bloch and Reinhard Bendix are generally interested in understanding social dynamics and the changes of culture and social structure. Attention to historical sequence is essential for such an understanding. Not all surveys of social change use a clear juxtaposition of different histories. Therefore, we may want to know: what motivates us to use comparison instead of focusing on a single historical trajectory, by comparing the specific patterns of history, what goals we pursue, and how to achieve these goals. Historians usually make comparisons. But not all history is comparative history. The difference between comparative historians is that they more or less explicitly regard comparison as a traditional social science method.