彼得.伯克：比较史学vs.比较社会学=“更谨慎vs.太胆大”？
Burke, Peter.2016. “Comparative History and Comparative Sociology.” Serendipities:Journal for the Sociology and History of the Social Sciences 1 (1): 82–88.
注：Serendipities:Journal for the Sociology and History of the Social Sciences 是刚创刊的一本关于社会学学科史主题的期刊，目前才出了第1期。
作为历史学家，同时又甚至写过《历史学与社会学》（后改名为《历史学与社会理论》）的跨界能手，彼得伯克一开头便说，比较法虽然是历史学与社会学共享的，但是二者的态度并不一样，吐糟了下社会学家~
——社会学家太胆大，历史学家更谨慎。
sociologists take the value of comparison for granted, while manyhistorians remain suspicious of it. When they do practice comparison, sociologistsare bolder, happily moving across great distances in space and time, likeMichael Mann, for example. Historians are much more cautious …
彼得伯克论述道，在18世纪的时候，系统（system）的观念开始变得重要起来，但这时候其实社会学家与历史学家都同时在使用比较法了。社会学：孟德斯鸠、亚当斯密，历史学：兰克、Joachim Lelewel，更不用提后来的Mill的比较法、韦伯、涂尔干、布洛克……。
不过，彼得伯克吐糟了下韦伯，看看：
… Weber, who considered himself a historian but has been described byposterity as a sociologist (favourably by sociologists but pejoratively by somehistorians).
比较法的建制化重要的是在于in 1958: Comparative Studies in Society and History创刊。
伯克提到一个有趣的想法，分析这刊物上社会学家与历史学家谁发表得多
It would be interesting to carry out an analysis of the articles, todiscover how many are written by sociologists and how many by historians.
进一步比较两个学科，他认为相对于在历史社会学兴起，常规地使用比较法，比如斯考切波、摩尔……，历史学没这么顺利。老头子在1970s编一套比较史丛书时，只出了4本便断了，实现劝服不了大家去搞这个——you can’t compare apples and oranges
不过，史学界的风向也转，现在的英国历史学家已经更为接受比较史学了，像Geoffrey Lloyd，global historian Felipe Fernández-Armesto。
那么，为什么要搞比较法呢？有两个理由。
1. 去地方狭隘化。
As Elliott recently re-iterated: ‘Even imperfect comparisons can helpto shake historians out of their provincialisms’
2. 使历史也能作科学解释, allows us to testexplanations
这种想法是建立在反事实历史的想法之上，当你有我没有A但B-C都差不多的时候，产生你的结果牛逼但我low的不同后果。
Again, the recent interest in what is known as ‘counter-factual’history – if the Spanish Armada had landed in England, for example – depends upon comparison, between what we believe to be the consequences of somethingthat happened and the possible consequences of something that didn’t happen.
正因如此，历史分析才由此视作为很科学范了。As Goody puts it: “Comparisonis one of the few things we can do in the historical and social sciences toparallel the kind of experiments the scientists do”.
但是，比较法也有缺点。
1. connected history（？？关联史学？怎么翻译？）的不满
——创造了人为的事体Their sharpestcriticisms concern the creation of artificial entities such as Protestantismand capitalism
2. 忽视了文化脉络
One obvious danger of comparison is that of ignoring the culturalcontext of the practices or institutions that one is studying.
3. 产生了实践与实在的静动差别，历史是过程但比较是冷冻时间。
treating as static groups practices or situations that are in realityalways changing.
4.族群中心主义、欧洲中心主义，拿自己来比别人。
为了解决这些问题，伯克提倡的比较是反转传统的比较方向：the principle of rotation
That is, we can take different regions as the norm in their turn.Weber, Bloch and other famous comparatists began with the West. It is equally legitimate to invert the procedure. For example, one well-known concept in economic history that has moved from East to West is that of ‘industrious revolution’, which Jan de Vries borrowed from Akira Hayami.
（Sociological理论大缸第65期）
链接：
第63期 历史社会学家真的【不引用】一手档案吗？对32本ASA获奖作品的分析
第62期 如何【精读细剖】一篇AJS理论文章？来次示范吧！（下部）
第61期如何【精读细剖】一篇AJS理论文章？来次示范吧！（上部）
第60期百年《美国社会学学报》,只有54篇“历史”论文？！清单。
第58期Kathleen Thelen and James Mahoney：比较—历史分析的获奖书单（2000-2014）
注：原预告推送的《克莱门斯：社会学作为历史科学》已改推为《历史社会学家真的【不引用】一手档案吗？对32本ASA获奖作品的分析》。
————————
（Sociological理论大缸第65期）
图片来源：<papi酱>20170120期