The presumption and arrogance of Hegel's philosophical enterprise is apparent. A powerful and profound thinker he believes that he understands all. It is thesis- antithesis - synthesis and that synthesis is new thesis - antithesis - synthesis. And this logic of mind is the logic of history. And it is all coming to climax in the nineteenth century Germany Hegel is living in.
The method of course leads to Marx. Two dialectic dummies.
The 'system' is of course opposed by Kierkegaard who wants real life in his philosophy and not ' system' and ' endless abstraction'.
The world actual history with all its surprising turns and new developments simply makes a joke of the Hegelian analysis. Technical reality gives far too much to our world to take someone like Hegel who could not possibly have understood it as its leader.
We still have the idea of development today. We still too need real and deep thinkers.
But Hegel is outmoded, gone without the tools to help us contend with what we are contending.

This book was wonderful. It shouldn't be read as a history but more as a philosophy. Even there, it is a bit short of the greats. Why then do I call it wonderful? It is a view into the past intelligentsia. His history is antiquated; from a modern perspective some of it is wrong. However, it is great to see the history of views about history and the philosophy of them. I am not a pursuer of the P.C., and understand that the context of civilization, at his time, is the molder of his views. Old books such as this are windows into time and are treasures to be cherished. As far as his philosophy I intend to read more of his work in the future to get a better perspective, but I found it interesting. I am on board with Hegel in that we should pursue our Ideal of the Greek Golden Era to maintain a lofty goal for civilization. Which can be summed up by Thucydides in his description of Athenian life; "We love the beautiful, but without ostentation or extravagance; we philosophize without being seduced thereby into effeminacy and inactivity (for when men give themselves up to Thought, they get further and further from the Practical--from activity for the public, for the common weal). We are bold and daring; but this courageous energy in action does not prevent us from giving ourselves an account of what we undertake (we have a clear consciousness respecting it); among other nations, on the contrary, martial daring has its basis in deficiency of culture: we know best how to distinguish between the agreeable and the irksome; notwithstanding which, we do not shrink from perils."