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, 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 authors' claim is that the "Triangle Trade" (described as a triangle but more like a rectangle) is misleading. The quote "What we call a triangle was really as round as the globe" directly supports this by emphasizing that the trade was more complex and global (not just a simple triangle - shaped trade as textbooks suggest). The other quotes either just mention the Triangle Trade (without challenging it), ask a question (not supporting a claim), or give an example (but the key supporting quote about the nature of the trade being more global is "What we call a triangle was really as round as the globe").

Answer:

"What we call a triangle was really as round as the globe."