In recent years, several realist interpretations of historical work have been presented within the philosophy of history. In this paper, I briefly examine three of them, namely I discuss the views of T. E. Førland, B. Mitrović and A. Timmins. I critically analyse their claims and try to identify what unites them. I focus mainly on the concept of fact and, in general, on the building blocks of their realism. In conclusion, I show that although these are new realist accounts, which in their own way also reflect on an anti-realist interpretation of history, they can still be characterized by an effort to find solid foundations for history.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.