all his predecessors and then consider him in relation with all his followers—in short, that you must steep yourself in that atmosphere of idealistic culture in which the Hegelian philosophy was formed and developed.
But in the case of Croce's book this reply is not in point, for this book cannot demand on the part of its critics any such preparation—a preparation which, in the last analysis, would immobilize the critic for so long a period that at its close he would have to admit—either in order to avoid confessing that he had wasted his time or as a result of slow intoxication or auto-suggestion—that Hegel was a great man and that his philosophy, though perhaps in need of still further development, will remain the best of all possible philosophies. For Croce's book is intended to serve as an introduction to the Hegelian system, as the indispensable means by which one may prepare himself to read Croce's translations of the works of Hegel. In other words, his book must stand or fall on its own merits; and if it is to attain the purpose for which it was written, it must be intelligible even to one who has not seen the title-pages of the Phenomenology of the Spirit and the Logic.
I know that Croce and his parrots are fond of saying that men who do not or will not read Hegel are intellectually lazy. The accusation would be in point if the men in question, while
