What is comparitive history?

answers1: Comparative history has nothing to do with "comparing events
in two or more places/times". Comparative history is an attempt to
discover the natural laws that govern the course of history in the
long-run. Most of professional historians find the idea of natural
law being a driving force of history repulsive and thus consider
comparative history a waste of time. <br>
<br>
The problem with most of comparative history is that scholars who do
it are usually educated in the wrong discipline (history) and thus are
unable to support their theories with any sort of verifiable formal
model. Most of people who produce convincing comparative history are
either mathematicians or life scientists (or, in case of Peter
Turchin, whose "Historical Dynamics" I highly recommend, both).
answers2: Comparative history is the comparison between different
societies at a given time or sharing similar cultural conditions.
Proponents of this approach include American historians Barrington
Moore and Herbert E. Bolton; British historians Arnold Toynbee and
Geoffrey Barraclough; and German historian Oswald Spengler. Several
sociologists have tried their hand, including Max Weber, Pitirim
Sorokin, S. N. Eisenstadt, Seymour Martin Lipset, and Michael Mann.
<br>
<br>
Historians generally accept the comparison of particular institutions
(banking, women's rights, ethnic identities) in different societies,
but since the hostile reaction to Toynbee in the 1950s, generally do
not pay much attention to sweeping comparative studies.
answers3: Best Answer: Comparative history has nothing to do with
"comparing events in two or more places/times". Comparative history is
an attempt to discover the natural laws that govern the course of
history in the long-run. Most of professional historians find the idea
of natural law being a driving force of history repulsive and thus
consider comparative history a waste of time.