I could not find any previous answers on this work in particular, but I would be very surprised if historians regarded any scholarship from the 19th century as flawless. Here are some links to earlier threads about historical materialism and the Marxist view of history:

• Is there a place for Marxist historiography in modern history? by u/commiespaceinvader and u/ThucydidesWasAwesome (thanks u/voyeur324 for finding this earlier!)
• To what extent is Marx's historical materialism used and accepted in academia (history journals, departments, and the like) as a methodological tool? by u/Stuffmanshaggy

There are also this more general threads:

• Marxist View of History Explanation by u/depanneur
• Critiques or Marxist historiography? by u/Kochevnik81 and u/unkosam

Edit: I just found this great list of earlier answers assembled by u/Antiquarianism, more thorough than the one I made now