The series of biographical programmes soon to engulf viewers in Russia, South Africa and the Middle East will be of little historical worth but of great sociological interest.

For what these polls provide are a fascinating insight into how nations understand themselves. The public prioritisation of great historical figures speaks volumes about national identity and its foundation myths. That is why it was no surprise that Winston Churchill won the title of Greatest Briton in the 2001 competition. As the success of last week’s BBC Two series Dunkirk has shown, we live in an historical universe still dominated by the Second World War. Children often learn little else beyond the defeat of Nazi Germany, while Churchill speaks to a sense of national virtue and moral certainty that is regarded as all too absent today.

A similar mood swept the German viewing public during the screening of Unsere Besten (“Our Best”). They ignored the merits of Goethe, Kant, Marx and Bismarck to choose another titan of 20th-century politics, Konrad Adenauer, the former leader of West Germany.

That, too, suggested a popular longing for a lost era of patriotic cohesion and clear, national identity. But, interestingly, the organisers of the programmes felt that they needed to disqualify Adolf Hitler from the poll.

For post-revolutionary nations the choice of heroes is even more insightful. Over the past 15 years Russian society has been transformed and with it a sense of Russian history. After the original anti-communist reaction of the early 1990s there has re-emerged a sympathy for some of the stability of the past. And while that might not extend as far as voting Stalin or Lenin as the Greatest Russian, some of the heroes of the Soviet republic will no doubt prove popular choices. Marshall Zhukov, architect of the Second World War campaign, and General Chuikov, victor of Stalingrad, could top the poll.

The more historically minded might reach for Peter the Great or General Kutuzov, the hero of Borodino. Alternatively, culture will win out — and here the choice is rich: Tolstoy, Pushkin, Chekhov, Dostoevsky and Tchaikovsky. Then again, President Putin might just stuff the ballots.

In South Africa, the battle is for second place. After the crowning of Nelson Mandela, will the votes fall along racial lines? With the white population far more likely to have access to television and phone lines, this must be a consideration.

Will General Smuts and Paul Kruger triumph over Steve Biko and Walter Sisulu? Let us hope the authorities do not feel the need to ban Dr Verwoerd, the postwar author of apartheid, from the list. But by far the most controversial choice will be for Great Arabs. As a pan-national series, it will take votes from across the Middle East.

If the top 100 names selected by a panel of scholars include the Prophet Muhammad, there will be little contest. Otherwise, there could be a line-up reflective of past military glory with the great conquerors of Jerusalem, King Nebuchadnezzar and Saladin, topping the poll. The civilising contributions of the mathematician al-Khwarizmi, the astronomer al-Biruni or the poet Nizami should feature strongly. But perhaps the smart money is on General Nasser, with Cleopatra as the Diana, Princess of Wales, choice.

Despite the myth-making and the hagiography that these programmes entail, such series do have the benefit of encouraging nations to discuss their pasts. But what would be of greater worth is for the BBC to allow British viewers this insight into other nations’ histories.

Tristram Hunt teaches history at Queen Mary, University of London. His advocacy of Isaac Newton won the BBC Worldwide poll for Greatest Briton.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Olympic-size television coming to your town
• Mosley opens new front in battle for privacy
• Decorator fined for smoking in van