This article presents a comparative analysis of criticism of conventional academic history, formulated in E. Wolfe’s book “Europe and the People Without History” and Dipesh Chakrabarty’s “Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference”. Critics address positivism, eurocentrism, progressivism, and stadial history, which Chakrabarty refers to as “historicism”. In the first part, the author explains the meaning of Chakrabarty’s concept of “historicism” and summarizes Wolfe’s description of conventional history, which fits in this concept. The second part focuses on the various elements of their criticism. In the third part we present quotes that showcase how both scholars strive to write history outside of the confines of the historicist paradigm.