20世纪70年代以后,美国与中国史学界分别提出建立公共史学与应用史学新学科,其共同的动因是为了寻求摆脱危机、发挥功能、适应社会需求的新途径。然而,美国公共史学建立了学科,取得了丰硕成绩,得到社会赞誉;中国的应用史学却未能形成独立学科,反而遭到学术界的批评。不同命运的原因在于内部的不同指向,公共史学力争运用史学方法,培养史学人才以扩大服务公众的范围;应用史学则侧重成果,侧重教化以发挥资治功能。不同命运的原因还在于外部的不同环境,美国的成熟市场、实用理念促使公共史学发展;中国的转型社会、“资治”传统与学术摇摆,限制了应用史学生存。 Since the 1970s, the United States and China historians have proposed to set up new disciplines of public historiography and applied historiography, respectively. Their common motivation is to find new ways to get out of crisis, function and adapt to the needs of society. However, the American public history has established its own disciplines, has achieved great achievements, and has been praised by the society. However, China’s applied history has failed to form an independent discipline, but has been criticized academically. Different fates are due to different internal points. Public history endeavors to apply historical methods to cultivate historians and talents so as to expand the scope of public service. Applied historiography focuses on achievements and emphasizes educational reform to give play to the function of capital and governance. The reasons for the different fates lie in the external environment. The mature markets in the United States and practical concepts promote the development of public historiography. The Chinese traditional society and the swaying of the “rule of capitalism” have limited the survival of applied historiography.