I'll try to respond to your post with as much brevity as I can:
Pre-socratic philosophy: Dominated by metaphysical issues, particularly with ontologies which (although largely consistent) were wishful thinking at best( for example, Pythagoras help that objects were numbers. A chair is a "number". What nonsense no?).
Socrates - Based his philosophy on syllologism and reason.
Plato - Rationalist/idealist.
Aristotle - Empiricist
Roman period: Skepticism, Stoicism, and other schools of little real interest.
Middle ages: Scholasticism. God is amazing and infinitely perfect and all that bollocks.
Renaissance: Philosophy based on reason again. Rationalism; Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Leibniz.
Post renaissance: Empiricism; Locke, Berkeley and Hume - then the romantics; Rousseau - and the German Idealists; Kant, in particular.
1800- 1900: German idealists continued; Hegel, Schopenhauer. Near the beginning the British Utilitarians; Bentham & J.S.Mill. Existentialists; Kierkegaard & Nietszche. Dialetical materialism Karl Marx( & Friedrich Engels) too. Pragmatists; William James, John Dewey, C.S.Pierce.
1900-2000: Logical/linguistic-analytic philosophy; Frege,Russell, Wittgenstein, Quine (later). Logical positivists; countless, but above all: Rudolf Carnap, Ernst Mach, Moritz Schlick. Existentialism continued: Satre. Phenomenolists; Husserl, Heidegger. Absurdism;Albert Camus. Deconstructivism; Derrida.
Philosophers of Mind & Language (Later period): Dennett, John Searle Functionalist, Hilary Putnam; Functionalist theories of mind and externalist theories of meaning.
May have missed a few; particular in regards to modern philosophy. But I wanted to keep it brief!
Can I request that you verify if you deem this interpretation of the history of western philosophy acceptible, before we move on to analysing it?
One does not easily suffer tryants but in monarchies we enamour several of them at once.