The First Imperial Age explores the origins of Europe's rise to world hegemony in the early modern period. After a slow start in the 1400s, the pace of European exploration and discovery quickened dramatically. By the end of the period, Europeans, in pursuit of Asia and the opportunities encountered en route, had determined the outlines of Africa, discovered and partly subjugated the Americans, opened a sea route to the Far East and established themselves in the great maritime economy of Asia. Scammell's detached and skeptical view highlights the ambiguities inherent in these triumphs.
Scammell sees the first imperial age as more important in setting the stage for the second than for changing European worldviews. As he puts it, "Economic thought was sharpened, strategic horizons were widened, European diet was enriched, more novelties and new luxuries became available. But this left little mark on Europe's slowly developing economy and rapidly changing culture." But, more importantly, a "general feeling of superiority to the rest of mankind" was "awakened." And that, most definitely, shaped the second imperial age.
Of course, this is just his conclusion. The book goes into great detail about the overseas activities of all the major powers--the government of their overseas lands, the nature of their trade and/or settlement, etc. He also discusses why the winners won and the losers lost. And he asserts that it wasn't because of great technology or such but because of the weaknesses and rivalries of the conquered nations. The most important, I think is that rival groups were used against each other with natives even serving in the armies of the European powers.