This book was adequate, but not exceptional for our elementary history needs. 60ish pages are adorned with color photographs and illustrations. Helpful appendices at the back are: Timeline, Glossary and Index. 
 Daily life such as homes, clothing, cooking and games are covered. As well as changing ideas such as the renaissance man, protestant reformation, scientific revolution and changes in economy and commerce. 
 Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo are treated to a section of their own, but rulers and explorers are interwoven into other topic headings such as literature, patrons and art, and government. While other forms of government are discussed, the city state sovereignty of "Rome, Florence and Venice" is highlighted in a section bearing that title. 
 However, as with the previous installment on the Middle Ages, I find Quigley in a significant factual error. This time it pertains to the section labeled "A War about Science". Here is her text: 
 "As scientists turned their attention to the stars and planets, new controversies arose. Copernicus was jailed for his idea that the planets revolved around the Sun and not the earth. Copernicus, a Polish astronomer, published a book promoting his idea. The Catholic Church banned the book because it was felt that God had put the Earth at the center of the universe." pg. 47 
 The problem with this is that Copernicus' book wasn't published until his death, so how could he be imprisoned? While I can find many other references to other scientists fearing imprisonment, or facing the Inquisition or Galileo's well known trial, I do not think Copernicus was ever imprisoned. Perhaps it is a misprint. I understand that these complex debates need to be clarified for elementary readers, but when there is a glaring error that I notice (and I have not had a ton of time to study the subject matter), it makes me question if there are other errors that I simply do not recognize. 
 Furthermore, as a Christian educator, it is bothersome to me that in both occasions where I have had reason to question Quigley (see my review of "The Middle Ages), matters of Christianity have been at play. Is this simply a coincidence or does the author have either faulty education or intentional opposition to the faith I am trying to pass to my students? 
 To some extent, this is to be expected. And I will not deny that this and a couple other statements caused good discussion in our class, but I would not be comfortable with students "going it alone" with the text as presented. Now that we own the book, we will keep it as adequate for our needs, but I'm not sure I can recommend it.