Question

read the passage from sugar changed the world. textbooks talk about the triangle trade: ships set out from europe carrying fabrics, clothes, and simple manufactured goods to africa, where they sold their cargoes and bought people. the enslaved people were shipped across the atlantic to the islands, where they were sold for sugar. then the ships brought sugar to north america, to be sold or turned into rum - which the captains brought back to europe. but that neat triangle - already more of a rectangle - is completely misleading. beekmans trade, for example, could cut out europe entirely. british colonists ships set out directly from new york and new england carrying the food and timber that the islands needed, trading them for sugar, which the merchants brought back up the coast. then the colonists traded their sugar for english fabrics, clothes, and simple manufactured goods, or they took their rum. which quotation best supports the authors claim and purpose? \textbooks talk about the triangle trade\ \beekmans trade, for example, could cut out europe entirely.\ \what could the europeans use to buy indian cloth?\ \what we call a triangle was really as round as the globe.\

Explanation:

The author's claim is that the idea of the Triangle - Trade as a neat triangle is misleading. The quote "Beekman's trade, for example, could cut out Europe entirely." shows that the trade routes were more complex and not as simple as the textbook - described triangle, thus supporting the claim.

Answer:

"Beekman's trade, for example, could cut out Europe entirely."