You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.

If there were a Nobel Prize in history, I suspect that a novelist, philosopher, anthropologist, economist, political scientist, sociologist or “popular” historian might be more likely to win than an academic historian. After all, the study of the past isn’t confined to the academy—Nobel-worthy contributions come from across the intellectual world.

Understanding the past requires diverse voices from philosophy, literature and social science. History is as much about theory, storytelling and insight as it is about reconstructing events “as they were.” A Nobel Prize in history should honor those—whether novelists, social scientists or philosophers—whose work has fundamentally shaped our understanding of the past.

Narrative imagination, conceptual insight and rigorous analysis are essential to illuminating history. A Nobel Prize in history should celebrate this interdisciplinary richness, acknowledging scholars, thinkers and storytellers alike for their transformative contributions to our understanding of humanity’s collective past.

This year’s Nobel Prize in Economics, awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson for their work on how European colonization shaped global inequality, underscores the historical nature of economic inquiry and the importance of interdisciplinary perspectives in understanding the past.


Acemoglu, one of the most influential economists of this generation, combines historical analysis, economic theory and empirical research to uncover the root causes of economic prosperity or stagnation.

In his landmark work, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty (2012), co-authored with Robinson, Acemoglu argues that inclusive political and economic institutions are the key drivers of long-term economic growth. These institutions encourage broad participation, protect property rights and foster innovation by creating a level playing field. In contrast, extractive institutions, which concentrate power and wealth among elites, stifle innovation, limit competition and exploit the population, leading to stagnation. The formation of these institutions, shaped by historical power struggles, explains why some nations succeed while others fail.

Acemoglu has also explored how elites manipulate institutions to maintain power through extractive practices. He emphasizes the critical role of political institutions, such as democratic governance and checks on executive authority, in preventing elites from capturing institutions. Thus, political power is deeply intertwined with economic development.

A central theme in Acemoglu’s work is the concept of “critical junctures”—moments when political or economic shocks, such as wars or revolutions, redirect a society’s developmental path. These critical junctures can lead to either inclusive or extractive institutional outcomes, highlighting the contingent nature of history and rejecting simplistic geographic or cultural explanations for economic success.

Acemoglu’s research also demonstrates how colonialism left a lasting legacy on today’s economic institutions. He argues that European colonizers established extractive institutions in regions like Africa and Latin America, where they exploited resources and labor, while settler colonies like North America developed more inclusive systems. This institutional divide continues to explain the economic divergence between former colonies.

Another focus of Acemoglu’s work is technological change and its relationship to inequality. He examines how innovations like automation and AI disproportionately benefit highly skilled workers while displacing low-skilled labor, exacerbating economic inequality.

In addition, Acemoglu has explored state capacity, arguing that a strong, functional state is essential for economic development but must be constrained by inclusive institutions to avoid authoritarianism. His work highlights the delicate balance between fostering development and avoiding unchecked state power.

Through his interdisciplinary research, Acemoglu has significantly contributed to our historical understanding of how events like colonization and revolutions have shaped long-term economic outcomes. His use of historical data to inform economic theory bridges the gap between economics and history, offering profound insights into how societies develop and how power dynamics persist across time.

Acemoglu’s work emphasizes that history is not a series of isolated events but a process shaped by key institutional choices. By exploring the historical roots of inequality, poverty and underdevelopment, he offers valuable lessons for addressing contemporary challenges. His research on colonialism, in particular, has deepened our understanding of the long-term impact of historical events on present-day economic and political realities, making him a pivotal figure in both economics and historical scholarship.


A Nobel Prize in history would likely honor those who have made transformative contributions to our understanding of the past, whether through academic scholarship, imaginative storytelling or interdisciplinary insights, with a strong emphasis on impact. The prize would recognize not only academic rigor but also narrative skills, accessibility and compelling storytelling.

Such works should also deepen our understanding of human nature, morality, ethics or philosophical questions related to power, conflict, justice or identity. In addition, these individuals should make an impact beyond academia, influencing public understanding of key issues in the modern world, such as racism, colonialism, economic inequality or human rights, and should have inspired or shaped the work of other scholars.

Groundbreaking research that introduces new perspectives, theories or methodologies might be one basis for awarding the prize. This could involve using new sources of evidence (e.g., previously untapped archives, archaeological discoveries, census registers and church and tax records), employing innovative approaches that challenge traditional narratives or reveal underrepresented histories or pioneering new fields such as gender history, environmental history or global history.

Novelists could be honored for historical fiction that brings the past to life with accuracy, emotional depth and the ability to illuminate broader historical themes. Philosophers might be recognized for exploring how we conceptualize time, causality and memory, while economists, political scientists, psychologists and sociologists could be celebrated for providing historically grounded analyses of social change, revolutions or the long-term development of economic and political systems.

The prize could also reward those who make history accessible to the public. This might include popular historians or documentarians who convey complex historical events or figures to a wide audience while maintaining scholarly rigor or public intellectuals who contextualize contemporary events within a historical framework, helping society better understand the present through the lens of the past.

Scholars who reinterpret key historical events or figures, challenge entrenched narratives, or offer revisionist interpretations that provide a more nuanced or accurate view of the past might also be honored. This could involve uncovering overlooked histories—such as those of marginalized groups, women or Indigenous peoples—or re-evaluating historical legacies like colonialism, slavery or totalitarianism and exploring their ongoing influence on modern societies.

The prize might also recognize those who have developed new frameworks for historical analysis, such as Karl Marx’s historical materialism, Fernand Braudel’s longue durée or Michel Foucault’s genealogy of power. It could honor those who changed the way scholars approach history, such as through comparative history, cultural history or microhistory or those who established new paradigms in historical thought that have influenced related fields like anthropology, political science or sociology.

In addition, a Nobel Prize in history could honor scholars who have broadened our understanding of global history and cross-cultural interactions, such as world historians who examine patterns of exchange, migration and interaction across regions or those who study the long-term impact of colonialism, imperialism or globalization on global inequalities and power dynamics.

Finally, the prize could be awarded to historians or thinkers whose work contributes to social justice, exploring the historical roots of systemic inequality—such as racism, sexism or class oppression—and how these forces continue to shape contemporary society.

It might also recognize those who link historical research to contemporary policy debates, advocating for reparations, reconciliation or justice for past wrongs or those whose work has had a global impact on how history is studied, taught and understood, fostering international collaboration on shared historical challenges like climate change, migration or conflict.


It’s noteworthy that the thinkers who most influenced my graduate school teachers—David Brion Davis, Peter Gay, Edmund S. Morgan and C. Vann Woodward—were not historians, but novelists like Robert Penn Warren, literary scholars like Perry Miller, philosophers and social scientists who offered new methods and frameworks for historical inquiry.

Philosophers like Theodor Adorno, whose critical theory encouraged historians to critique the power structures embedded in culture and to consider how ideology shapes historical consciousness, had a profound impact. So did Isaiah Berlin, who provided a structure for understanding the interplay between ideas, individuals and historical forces.

Economists like Stanley Engerman, Robert Fogel and Douglass North showed how statistics and economic models shed light on social and political developments, leading even nonquantifiers to draw upon statistical evidence. Leading political scientists and theorists, like Hannah Arendt, Robert Dahl and Seymour Martin Lipset, too, offered vital lenses for understanding power, authority and democracy. Their analyses of political movements, institutions and ideologies gave historians new tools to assess the development of democratic institutions and the tensions within them.

From psychology, figures like Gordon Allport, Erik Erikson and Leon Festinger offered key insights into human behavior, identity formation and cognitive dissonance. These insights were particularly useful to historians studying social movements, ideologies and the development of personal and collective identities over time.

Sociologists such as Barrington Moore Jr. provided important models for understanding class structures, revolution and political violence. His work helped my teachers understand the varying paths to modernity taken by different nations, providing a rich comparative framework for historical analysis.

Finally, theologians such as Reinhold Niebuhr and older thinkers like Antonio Gramsci, Karl Polanyi and Ernst Troeltsch contributed deeply to the moral and ethical dimensions of historical inquiry. Niebuhr’s Christian realism emphasized the limits of human perfectibility and the persistence of sin, shaping how my teachers approached the moral complexities of historical events. Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony showed how dominant groups maintain power through both coercion and ideological control. Polanyi’s critique of unregulated capitalism resonated with a generation of historians concerned with the social costs of market-driven societies.

By drawing on this wide array of interdisciplinary influences, my teachers transcended the narrow confines of traditional historical inquiry. They were able to explore larger questions of human experience, power and social change in ways that were enriched by the insights of economists, philosophers, political scientists, psychologists, sociologists and theologians. This cross-disciplinary engagement allowed them to produce historical scholarship that was intellectually expansive, ethically nuanced and deeply relevant to understanding the complexities of human society.


Who would meet the high standards for a Nobel Prize in history? Let’s consider the broad contributions of some fairly recent philosophers and social scientists, whose work has significantly shaped our understanding of the past.

Michel Foucault’s studies of power and social institutions, particularly in Discipline and Punish and The History of Sexuality, revealed how power operates through discourses and norms, reshaping the historical study of social control and cultural practices. Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction challenged traditional historical narratives, prompting historians to critically assess how texts and meaning are constructed. Paul Ricoeur contributed to historiography by exploring the relationship between narrative and history, influencing the study of how we write and remember the past.

Anthropologists like Clifford Geertz, with his “thick description,” encouraged historians to look beyond grand narratives to examine the detailed cultural practices of daily life. Thomas Kuhn’s concept of paradigm shifts revolutionized how historians understand scientific and intellectual change, emphasizing nonlinear progress. The economist Joan Robinson reshaped how we study capitalism, arguing that colonialism and inequality must be viewed in their historical contexts.

Benedict Anderson revolutionized the study of nationalism with his idea of “imagined communities,” showing how nations are socially constructed. Pierre Bourdieu’s ideas about social structures, power and agency have had a profound influence on social history. Shmuel Eisenstadt and Theda Skocpol offered structural analyses of modernization and revolutions, while Robert Putnam and Juan Linz provided insights into social capital and democratic breakdowns. James C. Scott’s studies on state formation and peasant resistance revealed the historical dynamics of governance and dissent. Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-systems theory reframed our understanding of global capitalism and economic history.

These thinkers, across disciplines and genres, have contributed immensely to our understanding of historical processes, power, identity and social change. If a Nobel Prize in history existed, it should recognize the transformative work of philosophers, social scientists and novelists, whose diverse contributions have enriched our comprehension of the past.


The list of influential scholars so far has been largely Western-centric. However, significant contributions to historical scholarship have come from scholars outside the United States and Europe, who have expanded the scope of historical inquiry by focusing on regions, themes and perspectives often overlooked by traditional Western historiography.

Leila Ahmed, an Egyptian historian, is known for her pioneering work in Islamic and Middle Eastern history, particularly on women’s roles in Islamic societies, blending religion, culture and power in her analysis.

Syed Hussein Alatas, a Malaysian sociologist and historian, is known for his critiques of colonialism and postcolonial development. His work deconstructs colonial stereotypes, showcasing their role in justifying exploitation and marginalization in Southeast Asia.

Partha Chatterjee, a key member of the Subaltern Studies collective, has significantly contributed to postcolonial theory and the intellectual history of South Asia, reshaping our understanding of Indian nationalism and the complex dynamics between colonialism and national identity.

Prasenjit Duara’s analysis of nationalism, modernity and imperialism has reframed our understanding of Chinese and East Asian history by placing it in a fresh global context.

Ranajit Guha, a founding figure in the Subaltern Studies collective, reshaped Indian historiography by shifting the focus away from elite perspectives and toward the experiences of marginalized groups, or subalterns. His work emphasized the importance of recognizing the agency of peasants, workers and other nonelite actors in both colonial and postcolonial India.

Toyin Falola has produced a vast body of work on Nigerian and African history, extending across topics such as Yoruba culture, colonialism and the African diaspora. Ali Mazrui, a Kenyan historian, has explored the political and religious history of Africa in a global context.

Thant Myint-U, a historian from Myanmar, has written extensively on Southeast Asian history and geopolitics, providing insights into the complex historical forces shaping the politics and culture of Myanmar and the wider region.

Ali Shariati, an Iranian historian and intellectual, was influential in shaping modern Iranian thought during the period leading up to the 1979 revolution. His writings explored how Islam shaped Persian culture and critiqued imperialism and colonialism through a unique blend of Marxist, existentialist and Islamic ideas.

Romila Thapar’s studies of the Maurya and Gupta Empires and the early history of the subcontinent has critically reassessed both colonial and nationalist interpretations of Indian history.

These scholars from outside the Western world have significantly enriched historical scholarship by introducing new perspectives on colonialism, nationalism, religion and culture, broadening the scope of global historical understanding.


Historical novelists have played a crucial role in shaping public understanding of the past, blending fact and fiction to create narratives that bring history to life. Through their storytelling, these authors help readers engage with historical events and figures on a personal and emotional level. Here are some of the most influential historical novelists from around the world whose works have shaped the public’s view of history.

Chinua Achebe, who died in 2013, is the author of Things Fall Apart (1958), a seminal work of African historical fiction. Set in precolonial Nigeria, it explores the arrival of British colonialism and Christian missionaries, depicting the resulting cultural upheaval. Achebe’s portrayal has shaped global understanding of the African colonial experience.

Isabel Allende intertwines personal stories with the political history of Chile, particularly the rise of dictatorship. Through multigenerational narratives, Allende provides insight into the political and social history of Chile and Latin America.

Alejo Carpentier’s The Kingdom of This World (1949) recounts the Haitian revolution through magical realism, blending historical facts with Afro-Caribbean cultural elements. His work has shaped readers’ understanding of the legacies of slavery and revolution in the Caribbean.

Shen Congwen, who died in 1988, was author of the classic Border Town (1934), which portrays rural life in premodern China, reflecting the social changes brought about by modernization. His depiction of small-town life offers a window into the historical transitions experienced in China during the early 20th century.

Mohammed Dib, who died in 2003, is the author of the Algerian Trilogy, which depicts life under French colonial rule and the struggle for independence. His novels provide a nuanced understanding of colonialism and the fight for liberation in North Africa.

Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Novels, starting with My Brilliant Friend (2011), explore the social, political and economic changes in post–World War II Italy, particularly in Naples, examining issues of class, gender and regional identity.

Amitav Ghosh, the author of the Ibis Trilogy (2008–2015), set during the Opium Wars, explores the interconnected histories of India, China and Britain. His expansive portrayal of colonial history and globalization has influenced how readers view the legacy of empire and global commerce.

Yaa Gyasi, in Homegoing (2016), traces the legacy of slavery across multiple generations, beginning in 18th-century Ghana and extending to the United States. Her exploration of the Atlantic slave trade and systemic racism offers a deeper understanding of the African diaspora and the enduring effects of slavery.

Hilary Mantel, who died in 2022, is best known for her Thomas Cromwell trilogy, which offers a detailed portrayal of the English Reformation and the court of Henry VIII, deeply influencing contemporary understanding of this tumultuous period.

Gabriel García Márquez, who died in 2014, incorporated historical elements that reflect the political and social history of Latin America. Using magical realism, he explored colonialism, civil wars and political corruption, shaping how readers understand Latin American history.

Orhan Pamuk, who is already a Nobel laureate, is known for historical novels like My Name Is Red (1998), set in 16th-century Istanbul. His work explores the clash between Ottoman and Western artistic traditions, reflecting the complex history of Turkey and its position between Europe and the Middle East.

Wole Soyinka, a Nobel Prize–winning playwright and novelist, engages with Nigeria’s colonial past and postcolonial challenges. His works, like Death and the King’s Horseman (1975), explore the intersections of tradition and modernity, offering insights into both African history and the universal struggle between indigenous cultures and colonial powers.

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o examines the complexities of anticolonial resistance during the Mau Mau uprising in 1950s Kenya. His work critiques British colonialism and its lasting impact on African societies, contributing to a broader understanding of postcolonial struggles.

Through their storytelling, these novelists have significantly influenced how readers across the globe understand history, offering personal, emotional and cultural perspectives that enrich public knowledge of the past.


In considering who might be deserving of a Nobel Prize in history, the implications for academic historians are clear: To remain relevant and impactful, their scholarship must transcend the confines of academic specialization and speak to a broader audience. Historians need to produce work that is not only rigorous but also highly readable and accessible, engaging with the fundamental moral, philosophical, psychological and political questions that shape our understanding of the past and present.

History that fails to do these things risks becoming mere antiquarianism and scholasticism—detached from the urgent concerns of society. In a world where the insights of novelists, social scientists and public intellectuals increasingly shape our understanding of the past, academic historians must embrace a more expansive, interdisciplinary approach, ensuring their work resonates beyond the walls of academia and contributes meaningfully to public discourse. Only then will they fulfill the true potential of their discipline: enriching our collective understanding of humanity’s shared history.

Steven Mintz is professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin and the author, most recently, of The Learning-Centered University: Making College a More Developmental, Transformational and Equitable Experience.

Next Story

Written By

More from Higher Ed Gamma