English
What purposes does the prologue serve? Select three options.
to provide background information to discuss events leading up to what happens in the text to offer a perspective on events in the text
Which claim do both passages support? The abolitionists were brilliant. They created the most effective public relations campaign in history, inventing techniques that we use to this day. When he spoke, Clarkson brandished whips and handcuffs used on slaves; he published testimonials from sailors and ship doctors who described the atrocities and punishments on slave ships. When Olaudah Equiano published his memoir, he educated his readers about the horrors of the slave trade. And then, when the English began to understand what slavery really was, Clarkson and others organized what we would call a boycott of "the blood-sweetened beverage." Slave labor was valuable because it produced cheap sugar that everyone wanted to buy. But if people stopped buying that sugar, the whole slave system would collapse. In the years leading up to the American Revolution, the women of New England refused to buy English products and English tea. The loss of income made London rescind some of the taxes it had imposed on America. Now this same tactic—boycotting—was used to fight slavery. Some 400,000 English people stopped buying the sugar that slaves grew and harvested. Instead, they bought loaves of sugar that carried a label that said, "Produced by the labor of FREEMEN"—the sugar came from India. Back in England, Clarkson and his friends saw their chance: France was no longer in the midst of a revolution, and Napoleon's sugar dreams had failed. England now had no excuse; the abolitionists would force their countrymen to face the question: Was England a nation built on Christian beliefs or on treating people as property? In 1806, the antislavery forces brought a new bill before Parliament that would limit British involvement in the slave trade. Some of the most powerful testimony in favor of the bill came from former army officers who had been to the Caribbean and had seen the courage of the former slaves and the horrors of slavery. The slaves spoke through the testimony of the very men who had gone to fight them. One member of Parliament told his colleagues of the tortures he had seen in the islands. Slavery was not an abstraction, an economic force, a counter in the game of world politics—it was the suffering of men and women. Members of Parliament were being confronted with the reality of slavery, just as audiences at Clarkson's lectures were when he showed shackles and whips. While Parliament debated the new bill, Clarkson and his allies went on lecturing, talking, changing minds all across England. They succeeded. Newspapers reported that even in Bristol, a port city with a harbor filled with slave ships, "the popular sentiment has been very strongly expressed against the continuance of that traffick in human flesh." William Wilberforce, another leader of the abolitionist cause, felt the new mood in his country. "God can turn the hearts of men," he marveled. Many members of Parliament recognized the same change in the "sense of the nation." In 1807 a bill to ban all English involvement in slave trading passed the House of Commons, then the House of Lords. At precisely noon on March 25, King George III signed the law.
Abolitionists used powerful speeches and presentations to engage people and persuade them to join the abolitionists' cause.
Which sentence best states the authors' claim in this passage? Sugar was the connection, the tie, between slavery and freedom. In order to create sugar, Europeans and colonists in the Americas destroyed Africans, turned them into objects. Just at that very same moment, Europeans—at home and across the Atlantic—decided that they could no longer stand being objects themselves. They each needed to vote, to speak out, to challenge the rules of crowned kings and royal princes. How could that be? Why did people keep speaking of equality while profiting from slaves? In fact, the global hunger for slave-grown sugar led directly to the end of slavery. Following the strand of sugar and slavery leads directly into the tumult of the Age of Revolutions. For in North America, then England, France, Haiti, and once again North America, the Age of Sugar brought about the great, final clash between freedom and slavery.
Economic demand for sugar led to political pressure to end enslavement.
Which text evidence best supports the authors' claim and purpose? By the 1800s, it was clear that the Age of Sugar—that combination of enslavement, factories, and global trade—was replacing the Age of Honey, when people ate local foods, lived on the land of their ancestors, and valued tradition over change. Sugar was the product of the slave and the addiction of the poor factory worker—the meeting place of the barbarism of overseers such as Thomas Thistlewood and the rigid new economy. And yet, for that very reason, sugar also became the lynchpin of the struggle for freedom. When we talk about Atlantic slavery, we must describe sugar Hell; and yet that is only part of the story. Africans were at the heart of this great change in the economy, indeed in the lives of people throughout the world. Africans were the true global citizens—adjusting to a new land, a new religion, even to other Africans they would never have met in their homelands. Their labor made the Age of Sugar—the Industrial Age—possible. We should not see the enslaved people simply as victims, but rather as actors—as the heralds of the interconnected world in which we all live today. And indeed, it was when the enslaved Africans began to speak—in words and in actions—when Europeans began to see them as human, that the Age of Sugar also became the Age of Freedom.
"And indeed, it was when the enslaved Africans began to speak—in words and in actions—when Europeans began to see them as human, that the Age of Sugar also became the Age of Freedom."
Which excerpt from the passage best states the authors' claim? Why were the English the first to build factories to mill cloth? Because of the wealth they gained, the trade connections they made, and the banking systems they developed in the slave and sugar trade. Indeed, the cheap cloth from the factories was used to clothe the slaves. English factories, you might say, were built, run, and paid for by sugar.
"English factories, you might say, were built, run, and paid for by sugar."
Which line from the passage best provides evidence to support the claim that sugar was more of "a killer" in Louisiana than in the Caribbean? In every single American slave state, the population of enslaved people kept rising even after the slave trade was abolished. That was because enough enslaved children were born, lived, and grew to become adults. There was just one exception to this rule: Louisiana, where the native-born enslaved population kept dropping. Sugar was a killer. Unlike the Caribbean, Louisiana has cold snaps. That put an additional pressure on the sugar harvest. Not only did the slaves need to harvest the cane in perfect rhythm with the grinding mills, but the entire crop had to be cut down between mid-October and December. This pace only increased when growers installed improved, steam-powered mills. People needed to work faster than the weather and to keep pace with machines.
"People needed to work faster than the weather. . . ."
Which text evidence best supports the authors' claim that sugar became an essential source of energy to English workers in the 1800s? Traditionally, English workers had brewed their own beer, which they drank along with bread, their other major source of food. A Scottish writer of the late 1700s noticed that tea had "become an economical substitute to the middle and lower classes of society for malt liquor," which they could no longer afford. "Tea," which had to be transported from Asia, and "sugar brought from the West Indies . . . compose a drink cheaper than beer." The new drink soon became not only cheap but necessary. Why did the English, in particular, need a low-cost, filling hot drink? In a word: factories. England was the first country in the world to shift from making most of its money in traditional places, such as farms, mines, or small shops, to factories. In the early 1800s the English figured out how to build machines to weave cloth, and how to organize workers so that they could run the machines. Factory workers needed to leave their homes to go to work—they were not on farms where they could grow their own food, nor were they in shops where they could stop when they wanted to have a snack. Instead, they worked together in long shifts, taking breaks when allowed. Factory workers needed cheap food that was easy to transport and that gave them the energy to last until the next break. All over England, in sooty cities such as Manchester and Liverpool, when the factory whistle blew, workers would set down their presses and file out to drink a quick cup of tea sweetened with sugar—usually dipping a piece of bread in the warm drink. Soon a smart manufacturer figured out that this break, and the need for a jolt of sweetness, was an opportunity. English workers were offered sugary cookies and candies—what we call today energy bars—that quick pick-me-up that helped workers to make it through their long shifts. Starting around 1800, sugar became the staple food that allowed the English factories—the most advanced economies in the world—to run. Sugar supplied the energy, the hint of nutrition, the sweet taste to go with the warmth of tea that even the poorest factory worker could look forward to. Sugar was a necessity.
"Starting around 1800, sugar became the staple food that allowed the English factories—the most advanced economies in the world—to run."
What evidence from the passage best supports the inference that white sugar was rarer and more valuable than brown sugar? With the rise of Islam, Egypt became the world's great sugar laboratory. The kind of sugar easiest to produce from cane is dark—the color comes from molasses, which also makes that form of sugar spicy and even bitter. What we call molasses is just a natural part of the first grinding of sugar cane into syrup. Sugar refiners drain out the dark molasses to use by itself and are left with relatively white sugar. The noble and wealthy, who could afford sugar, wanted it to be as pure, sweet, and white as possible. The Egyptians figured out how to meet that need.
"The kind of sugar easiest to produce from cane is dark" "wanted it to be as pure, sweet, and white as possible"
Which text evidence best supports the authors' claim that a frantic pace made working conditions even worse? Cutting cane was hard work, but it was nothing like what came next: Piles of freshly cut cane had to be fed into the ever-turning mill wheels, until they were completely crushed. The owners insisted that during the work hours the grinding never stop, no matter what. The mills were most often tended by women who were doing dangerous work while getting almost no rest. That was a very bad combination. An ax was often propped up near the rollers so if a slave closed her eyes for a second while pushing the cane, her arm could be hacked off before she was pulled through the merciless grinders. Guests at sugar plantations often remarked on how many one-armed people they saw. Day after day, week after week, month after month, the cane was cut, hauled to the mill, and fed through the rollers. The mills kept going as long as there was cane to grind—the season varied between four and ten months, depending on the local growing conditions. A visitor who came to Brazil in 1630 described the scene: "People the color of the very night, working briskly and moaning at the same time without a moment of peace or rest, whoever sees all the confused and noisy machinery . . . will say that this indeed is the image of Hell."
"The owners insisted that during the work hours the grinding never stop, no matter what."
What evidence from the passage best supports the inference that Europe was dangerous for merchants to travel to before the 1100s? n the 1100s, the richest Europeans slowly began to add more flavor to their food—because of a series of fairs and wars. A smart count in the Champagne region of France guaranteed the safety of any merchant coming to sell or trade at the markets in the lord's lands. Soon word spread, and the fairs flourished. Starting around 1150, the six Champagne fairs became the one place where Europeans could buy and sell products from the surrounding world—a first step in connecting them to the riches and tastes beyond. Fortress Europe was slowly opening up.
"guaranteed the safety of any merchant"
Which details would best fit in a summary of this passage? But it is in India, where it was used as an offering in religious and magical ceremonies, that we have the first written record of sugar. Long before the first pyramids were built in Egypt, the ancient Sumerians traded with the people of Harappa and Mohenjo Daro, who lived along the Indus River. Unfortunately, we are still not able to read the writings left behind from those ancient cities. So the first documents telling us about life in that region come from a much later period. These Hindu sacred teachings were probably first gathered together sometime between 1500 and 900 B.C., and were carefully memorized. Only hundreds of years later were they finally written down. The Hindu writings tell us of a religion in which fire was extremely important. People believed that the gods gave fire to human beings. Yet fire was also a way for humans to reach the gods. By placing offerings in a special fire, a priest could turn them into smoke and send them on to the gods. Five ingredients were selected for this special burning: milk, cheese, butter, honey, and sugar cane.
"in India . . . it was used as an offering in religious and magical ceremonies" "the first written record of sugar"
How do the authors develop the claim in the two passages? England had begun talking about ending slavery, but then it saw the chaos in France and sent an army to try to defeat the Haitians. Now Napoleon's France followed in the footsteps of the English. Napoleon's 35,000-man army was led by his brother-in-law and soon scored an amazing success: They captured Toussaint in 1802 and brought him to France, where he died in prison in 1803. But the former slaves fought on. In two years of fighting, nearly 50,000 French soldiers died. And on January 1, 1804, the victorious Republic of Haiti was born. Fighting for freedom, the former slaves defeated the armies of first England, then France: Europe's two most powerful nations. Haiti was born free; human rights won over property rights. In 1807 a bill to ban all English involvement in slave trading passed the House of Commons, then the House of Lords. At precisely noon on March 25, King George III signed the law. We should mark that date, honor it, to this day. For while no slaves were freed by the bill, it marked a great change in the world. More slaves from Africa had been shipped by the British than by any other nation. That part of the grim history of sugar and slavery was over. Indeed, that very same year Congress passed a law forbidding Americans from being involved in importing slaves. In the great contest over whether a human, any human, could ever be property; the tide was turning.
Both passages support the claim that human rights became more important than property rights in the early 1800s.
Which statement best summarizes this passage? After the Egyptians crushed cut cane and captured the juice, they boiled and strained the liquid, let it settle, then strained it again. The cane juice was now poured into molds with holes in the bottom, so that all the liquid could drain out, leaving only a powder. That powder was then mixed with milk and boiled again. After one round of these steps, the process was repeated all over again. As a result of all this effort and care, Egypt was known for the "whitest and purest" sugar.
Egyptians created an innovative process for refining white sugar.
Which inference does this passage support? The Hindu writings tell us of a religion in which fire was extremely important. People believed that the gods gave fire to human beings. Yet fire was also a way for humans to reach the gods. By placing offerings in a special fire, a priest could turn them into smoke and send them on to the gods. Five ingredients were selected for this special burning: milk, cheese, butter, honey, and sugar cane.
Hindu people must have valued the five substances they used as sacrifices.
Which statement best summarizes this passage? When the prophet Muhammad began preaching in A.D. 610, he attracted only a few disciples. Yet by the time he died in 632, his faith had spread throughout Arabia. By 642, the armies of Muslim conquerors, along with the arguments of the Muslim faithful, took the religion all across Syria, Iraq, parts of Iran, and Egypt. From there, Islam spread through North Africa along the Mediterranean, across to the Iberian Peninsula, and over to France. Islam's march into Europe ended in 732, when the French defeated the Muslim armies at the battle of Poitiers. But that was not all. Muslim rulers took Alexander's old lands in Afghanistan and then, from there, swept through to conquer northern India. The pagan tribes of Central Asia chose Islam. By conversion or conquest, Islam, the religion of Muhammad, won over nearly all the lands of the ancient world: Egypt, Persia, India, and the Christian Mediterranean.
Islam spread widely through invading armies and voluntary conversion.
How does the comparison of sugar to honey reveal the authors' purpose? Sugar is different from honey. It offers a stronger sweet flavor, and like steel or plastic, it had to be invented. In the Age of Sugar, Europeans bought a product made thousands of miles away that was less expensive than the honey from down the road. That was possible only because sugar set people in motion all across the world—millions of them as slaves, in chains; a few in search of their fortunes. A perfect taste made possible by the most brutal labor: That is the dark story of sugar.
It informs readers that there is a connection between slavery and sugar
How does the conclusion of the prologue support the authors' purpose? Sugar is a taste we all want, a taste we all crave. People throughout the planet everywhere have been willing to do anything, anything at all, to get that touch of sweetness. We even know exactly how thrilling it was to taste sugar for the first time. When the Lewis and Clark Expedition met up with the Shoshone, who had little previous contact with Old World products, Sacagawea gave a tiny piece of sugar to a chief. He loved it, saying it was "the best thing he had ever tasted." Sugar created a hunger, a need, which swept from one corner of the world to another, bringing the most terrible misery and destruction, but then, too, the most inspiring ideas of liberty. Sugar changed the world. We begin that story with a man who could never know enough.
It introduces the topic that will be addressed next It states why the topic is relevant to readers.
What is the purpose of this passage? Read the passage from Sugar Changed the World. I wanted to know more about the beguiling Nina, and my cousin had plenty of stories to share. He told me that her grandfather was a Russian serf—a farmer who could be bought and sold by the noble who owned his land. Family legend has it that this serf, a remarkable and intelligent man, helped to change the course of the history of sugar. In the early 1800s, the British controlled most of the sugar plantations of the Caribbean and the sea routes to Europe. As a result, their rivals were desperate to find a new way to create sugar. They turned to beets.
It provides background on how a family from Russia got into the sugar business.
How does the photograph help the reader understand the text? The photograph is of the cement huts near the beach slaves slept in. Text: The painstaking work had just one aim: to plant a crop that would end up taking the life of every worker who touched it. As [Olaudah] Equiano explained, the sugar slaves could hardly rest even when their day was done. Their huts, which ought to be well covered, and the place dry where they take their little repose, are often open sheds, built in damp places; so that when the poor creatures return tired from the toils of the field, they contract many disorders, from being exposed to the damp air in this uncomfortable state.
It shows how enslaved people were exposed to the outside elements and weather.
How does the image most support the central idea of this text? It is an image of slaves on a plantation performing the varius tasks of producing sugar.
It shows the large numbers of workers and tasks required to refine sugar.
Which excerpt from the passage best states the authors' claim? As a weeder, your job was to carefully pick away the undergrowth that could choke the cane stalks and stop them from growing tall enough, or that might attract vermin. Cleaning and weeding was done as many as three times while the cane grew, and it was some of the worst labor. A weeder spent ten to fourteen hours a day bent over with a hoe, digging out the unwanted growths at the base of the knobby cane stalks, ignoring the rats that might scuttle over his or her feet or the bladelike leaves that slashed at the worker's wrists and arms. Rats were everywhere—the records from one plantation in Jamaica report three thousand of them captured in just six months.
It was some of the worst labor."
How does the use of the word machine support the authors' claim in this passage? For an African, whether you were sent to the Caribbean or South America, you were now part of the sugar machine. And it did not much matter where your ship landed. You could be working the fertile fields of Brazil or the hills of Jamaica; the brutal cycle of making sugar was much the same.
Its negative connotation indicates that enslaved people had to work like robots instead of human beings.
Workers could not leave the plantation unless they had a pass. And if they did decide to explore on their own, without permission, they could be thrown in jail, sentenced to hard labor, or lose some of their hard-earned wages. A charge of "idling" in the fields could result in the loss of a whole week's wages. Worse, if they dared rebel or protest, their contract could be transferred to another estate. And there were still complaints of flogging or mysterious deaths. Life, as the historian Hugh Tinker noted, was like being a prisoner on parole. Which question does this passage answer most effectively?
What was life actually like for indentured Indians?
Sugar turned human beings into property, yet sugar led people to reject the idea that any person could be owned by another. Sugar murdered millions, and yet it gave the voiceless a way to speak. Sugar crushed people, and yet it was because of sugar that Gandhi began his experiment in truth—so that every individual could free him- or herself. Only sugar—the sweetness we all crave—could drive people to be so cruel, and to combat all forms of cruelty. The craving for sugar took us from that ancient time when people were defined by the work of their ancestors to our modern world—the one Gandhi led us to see, in which each individual is valued as human. Though terrible conditions for sugar workers still exist in places such as the Dominican Republic, and cane sugar has been replaced by other sweeteners invented in the Age of Science, this one substance forever marked our history.
Sugar plantations were violent systems, but sugar also led some people to reject slavery.
Which claim do both passages support? By the late 1700s, Saint Domingue (what is now Haiti) was the world center of sugar. So many sugar plantations dotted the landscape that slaves called commanders managed other slaves. On the night of August 14, 1791, commanders from the richest sugar plantations in Saint Domingue gathered in a place called Alligator Woods and swore a solemn oath. They would rise up against their white owners, "and listen to the voice of liberty which speaks in the hearts of all of us." That voice told them to destroy everything related to sugar. Sugar made the Africans slaves, so sugar must be wiped off the island, now a vast sugar factory to the world. By the end of August, the French colony was in flames. So many cane fields were on fire that the air was filled with "a rain of fire composed of burning bits of cane-straw which whirled like thick snow." Smashing mills, destroying warehouses, setting fields on fire, the freedom fighters demolished some one thousand plantations—and that was just in the first two months of their revolution. The fight against sugar and chains soon had a leader, Toussaint, who called himself "L'Ouverture"—the opening. Toussaint was making a space, an opening, for people to be free. When the Haitians defeated the French armies, Napoleon lost control of the world's most productive sugar islands and with it his dream of great sugar profits. As a result, Napoleon had no use for the land in North America he had so recently obtained from Spain. Napoleon did, though, need money to pay for his wars. That is why he sold the vast Louisiana Territory to Jefferson for the bargain price of just fifteen million dollars. What textbooks call the Louisiana Purchase should really be named the Sugar Purchase. Americans obtained the middle part of what would become their nation because the Haitians achieved their freedom.
Sugar was such a powerful economic force that it led to significant political changes.
A fire was lit in a giant iron cauldron, and the certificates of 2,300 Indians were tossed into the flames—the first major act of Satyagraha. "I am not property," the Indians were showing. "I am not your victim," they were demonstrating. "I have the power of my conscience," they were proving. The quiet strength of the Indian community shook the South African government. And by June 1914 it gave in; the Black Act was taken off the books. The Indians had insisted that they were not mere workers but were citizens—and finally the government could not resist. What is the authors' claim in this passage?
The Indians' demonstration and act of resistance was a successful strategy to change laws.
How do the authors use English history to support the claim that many people joined the antislavery movement for moral reasons? In 1806, the antislavery forces brought a new bill before Parliament that would limit British involvement in the slave trade. Some of the most powerful testimony in favor of the bill came from former army officers who had been to the Caribbean and had seen the courage of the former slaves and the horrors of slavery. The slaves spoke through the testimony of the very men who had gone to fight them. One member of Parliament told his colleagues of the tortures he had seen in the islands. Slavery was not an abstraction, an economic force, a counter in the game of world politics—it was the suffering of men and women. Members of Parliament were being confronted with the reality of slavery, just as audiences at Clarkson's lectures were when he showed shackles and whips. While Parliament debated the new bill, Clarkson and his allies went on lecturing, talking, changing minds all across England. They succeeded. Newspapers reported that even in Bristol, a port city with a harbor filled with slave ships, "the popular sentiment has been very strongly expressed against the continuance of that traffick in human flesh." William Wilberforce, another leader of the abolitionist cause, felt the new mood in his country. "God can turn the hearts of men," he marveled. Many members of Parliament recognized the same change in the "sense of the nation." In 1807 a bill to ban all English involvement in slave trading passed the House of Commons, then the House of Lords. At precisely noon on March 25, King George III signed the law.
The authors provide a primary-source quotation from a British abolitionist named William Wilberforce.
A fire was lit in a giant iron cauldron, and the certificates of 2,300 Indians were tossed into the flames—the first major act of Satyagraha. "I am not property," the Indians were showing. "I am not your victim," they were demonstrating. "I have the power of my conscience," they were proving. The quiet strength of the Indian community shook the South African government. And by June 1914 it gave in; the Black Act was taken off the books. The Indians had insisted that they were not mere workers but were citizens—and finally the government could not resist. What evidence do the authors include to support the central idea of this passage?
The burning of certificates and the repeal of the Black Act show that the Indians reclaimed their power.
How do the details in this passage support the author's purpose? Slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1833, thirty years before the Emancipation Proclamation in the United States. But even after they freed their slaves, the sugar plantation owners were desperate to find cheap labor to cut cane and process sugar. So the British owners looked to another part of the empire—India—and recruited thousands of men and women, who were given five-year contracts and a passage back. For a person from India, going overseas was not a simple matter. Once you crossed the "black water" of the surrounding oceans, you were said to have "gone to tapu." You no longer had any place in your village and could not be accepted back until you went through a special ceremony. Leaving India truly meant giving up your home; yet for some—for my family—that was their only chance for a better life.
The details about families leaving for a better life inform readers about the status of the author's family.
How do the details in this timeline support the authors' purpose? 1789French Revolution begins with the declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen1791Children of free parents in French sugar colonies are granted the full rights of French Citizens, no matter what their color or origin; slavery abolished within borders of France1792French leaders begin to use the guillotine to execute enemies1793Louis XVI executed; Marie Antoinette executed1794Slavery abolished in all French sugar colonies1799Napoleon takes power in France1800Napoleon gains control of the center of North America—the Louisiana Territory from Spain, plans to use it to feed and supply his sugar islands1802Napoleon makes slavery legal again
The details about the changing laws in France help inform readers that Napoleon wanted to produce sugar cheaply by using enslaved people.
How do the details in the passage support the central idea? The vast Muslim world was wonderful for the growth of knowledge. The Greeks had developed a level of practical experience and technical understanding a thousand years more advanced than anyone else nearby. The Muslims began to translate some of these ancient Greek texts. From India, Muslims learned of the zero, which allowed them to invent what we still call "Arabic" numerals. And because the Koran, the sacred book of Islam, is written in Arabic, scholars throughout the Muslim world learned to read Arabic and to share their knowledge. The Muslims swept past Jundi Shapur and learned the secrets of sugar. As they conquered lands around the Mediterranean Sea, they spread word of how to grow, mill, and refine the sweet reed.
The details describe the important role Muslims played in spreading knowledge throughout the world.
How do the details in this passage support the central idea? In the 1100s, the richest Europeans slowly began to add more flavor to their food—because of a series of fairs and wars. A smart count in the Champagne region of France guaranteed the safety of any merchant coming to sell or trade at the markets in the lord's lands. Soon word spread, and the fairs flourished. Starting around 1150, the six Champagne fairs became the one place where Europeans could buy and sell products from the surrounding world—a first step in connecting them to the riches and tastes beyond. Fortress Europe was slowly opening up.
The details provide examples of how France gradually became a place for worldwide trade.
Mohandas K. Gandhi (later known as the Mahatma or Great One) was born in India to a traditional Hindu family. When he was given the opportunity to study law in England, he faced the same problem as the indentured sugar workers: He would lose caste if he crossed the black water. His family arranged a special ceremony that allowed him to make the trip without giving up his place in society. Thus, in 1894, freshly educated in England, Gandhi made a second journey. He began practicing law in Natal, a region in what is now South Africa. He moved there because many Indians were already in Natal, laboring as indentured sugar workers. One day, Gandhi later explained, "a man in tattered clothes, headgear in hand, two front teeth broken and his mouth bleeding, stood before me trembling and weeping." The indentured worker, whose name was Balasumdaram, had been badly beaten by his employer. Gandhi knew that Balasumdaram was trapped. For no matter how poorly he had been treated by his boss, if he left the plantation, he could be prosecuted and jailed. Gandhi saw indenture for what it was: "almost as bad as slavery. Like the slave the indentured labourer was the property of his master." How does the evidence most support the central idea that Gandhi recognized indentured servants' brutal treatment?
The evidence details how Gandhi saw a man who had been beaten and knew that the man could not leave.
Gandhi began to see that there was a way for the indentured Indians to strengthen themselves without having to rely on machetes and guns. Freedom, he realized, did not come only from rising up against oppressors or tyrants. It could also be found in oneself. The mere fact that the sugar masters treated their workers as some form of property did not mean the Indians had to accept that definition. In fact, it was up to them to claim, to assert, their own worth, their own value. A man who had his inner, personal dignity was free—no matter how a boss tried to bully him. Gandhi's years in South Africa became a laboratory, as he experimented with how to be a truthful, free person. Finally, he was ready to put his ideas into practice. How does the evidence support the central idea that Gandhi decided it was time to replace violence with nonviolent protest?
The evidence shows how Gandhi experimented with ways to assert one's dignity and be free
How does the illustration best help the reader understand the text? Slaves were given long, sharp machetes, which would be their equipment—but for some also their weapons—until the harvest was done. The cutters worked brutal, seemingly endless shifts during the harvest—for the hungry mills crushed cane from four in the afternoon to ten the next morning, stopping only in the midday heat. Slaves had to make sure there was just enough cane to feed the turning wheels during every one of those eighteen hours. They worked in teams, a man slashing the cane, a woman binding every twelve stalks into a bundle. According to one report from 1689, each pair of workers was expected to cut and bind 4,200 stalks a day. Exactly how much they cut depended on how much their mill could handle—the cutting must never get a day ahead of the grinding, for then the sugar cane would dry up. In this illistration by William Clark, Enslaved people cut sugar cane in a field.
The illustration helps the reader recognize how teams cut and bundled sugar cane
What is the central claim of this passage? Seeing the fortunes being made in sugar, the French started their own scramble to turn the half of the island of Hispaniola that they controlled (which is now Haiti), as well as Martinique, Guadeloupe, and French Guiana (along the South American coast near Dutch Guiana), into their own sugar colonies, which were filled with hundreds of thousands more African slaves. By 1753, British ships were taking an average of 34,250 slaves from Africa every year, and by 1768, that number had reached 53,100. The sugar that piled up on the docks near the plantations was something new in the world: pure sweetness, pure pleasure, so cheap that common people could afford it. Scientists have shown that people all over the world must learn to like salty tastes, sour tastes, mixed tastes. But from the moment we are born, we crave sweetness. Cane sugar was the first product in human history that perfectly satisfied that desire. And the bitter lives of the enslaved Africans produced so much sugar that pure sweetness began to spread around the world.
The joys of sugar were the result of the suffering of enslaved African people.
What claim do the authors make in this passage? You could date a great change in the world to a visit one Madame Villeneuve made to France in 1714. That year, Pauline, an enslaved woman from the Caribbean, arrived in France as the personal servant of her mistress. When Madame Villeneuve set off from the coast to visit Paris, she left Pauline in a convent. The young woman spent her time studying with the nuns and went so far in her training that she asked to become a nun herself and remain in the convent. The nuns agreed, which enraged Madame Villeneuve. She rushed to a judge, demanding to have her property back. Was Pauline a free woman, a bride of Christ, or an item to be bought, sold, and warehoused when she was not in use? Twenty-three years earlier, King Louis XIV had issued a set of rules that defined slavery as legal in the French sugar islands. But when two slaves managed to reach France, he freed them—saying they became free "as soon as they [touched] the soil" of France. The judges sided with Pauline—she was real to them, human, not a piece of property. For Pauline's judges, as for King Louis, slavery far off across the seas was completely different from enslaved individuals in France.
The judges' freeing of Pauline would have a significant effect on how people viewed involuntary servitude.
This map shows how the Triangle Trade has traditionally been depicted. Which statement best explains how the map supports the text? The text is about the trangle trade (global trade that kickstarted upon the europeans running into the Americas)
The map shows a common and simplistic presentation of how sugar-related trade worked.
How do the authors use historical evidence to support their claim in this passage? Knowing that their slaves were likely to die by the time they reached their thirties, Louisiana sugar planters were extremely selective—they bought only healthy-looking young men in their late teens. On average, the men purchased in Louisiana were an inch taller than the people bought in the other slave states. Those teenagers made up seven to eight out of every ten slaves brought to America's sugar Hell. The others were younger teenage girls, around fifteen to sixteen years old. Their job, for the rest of their short lives, was to have children. Elizabeth Ross Hite knew that, for sure, "all de master wanted was fo' dem wimmen to hav children." Enslaved children would be put to work or sold. The overseer S.B. Raby explained, "Rachel had a 'fine boy' last Sunday. Our crop of negroes will I think make up any deficiencies there may be in the cane crop." That is, a master could sell any slaves who managed to live, if he needed more money than he could make from sugar. Jazz was born in Louisiana. Could it be that a population of teenagers, almost all of them male, were inspired to develop their own music as a way to speak, to compete, to announce who they were to the world? Bomba in Puerto Rico, Maculelê in Brazil, jazz in Louisiana—all gave people a chance to be alive, to be human, to have ideas, and dreams, and passions when their owners claimed they were just cogs in machinery built to produce sugar.
They argue that extremely difficult conditions inspired enslaved young men to invent new forms of music
How do the authors use historical evidence to support their claim? With their victory, the people of Saint Domingue announced that the conflict between freedom and property was over: "All men are equal" meant that no men are property. This idea terrified the English—and not merely because their sugar island of Jamaica was just over a hundred miles across the water from Saint Domingue. Indeed, slaves in Jamaica were beginning to sing a new song while they worked: One, two, tree,All de same;Black, white, brown,All de same;All de same.One, two, tree,All de same! That chant did more than threaten a slave revolt—it was a challenge to all ranking hierarchies. Jamaica had already seen many slave revolts, and the reverend John Lindsay was certain that the talk of freedom and liberty in North America had inspired the slaves: "At our tables (where . . . every Person has his own waiting man behind him) we have I am afraid been too careless of Expressions, especially when the topic of American rebellion has been . . . brandished with strains of Virtuous Heroism." But the slaves did not need to overhear their masters to learn about the ideas of equality. Black sailors working ships running all through the islands were carrying the word. And if this spirit of liberty got out of hand, that could be really dangerous. After all, in England itself only 3 percent of the population had the right to vote. If this expanded idea of freedom spread, how safe were the kings and dukes, earls and knights, of England? Starting in fall 1793, British troops began arriving in Saint Domingue to reenslave people and return them to their sugar plantations. As Henry Dundas, the British secretary of war, put it, their goal was to "prevent a circulation in the British Colonies of the wild and pernicious Doctrines of Liberty and Equality."
They use a primary source to show that a song was spreading the idea of equality across the Caribbean. They use a primary source to show that some white people opposed the idea of freeing enslaved people.
Which pieces of evidence are most likely empirical?
a historical study showing that Indian workers were paid low wages research showing that planters encouraged rivalry between workers
Which details do the authors include to support the claim in this passage? In 1733, Parliament ruled that an extra six cents must be added to the price of every gallon of molasses that did not come from an English source. If the colonists actually followed the rules of the Molasses Act, it would have terrible consequences. Molasses from French islands would now be too expensive—merchants could never make a profit. So they would have to turn to the English, who would surely raise their prices. This one law could cripple the entire North American trade with the sugar islands—if, that is, the colonists or the French followed the rules. But of course they did just the opposite. The Molasses Act accomplished nothing except to make Americans better smugglers. Yet the act was renewed again and again—until the crucial year of 1763. Just as the Molasses Act was due to expire, England completed its victory over France in the global contest known as the Seven Years' War (the segment of that war fought in North America is often called the French and Indian War). To pay for the war, the prime minister decided to put some teeth into the legislation. Now called the Sugar Act, the law was designed to make sure the American colonists stopped smuggling and paid their sugar tax.
an explanation of what was being taxed and how much it cost an explanation of why the Americans smuggled molasses an explanation of why the British imposed the Sugar Act
Which type of evidence would most likely include a testimonial?
anecdotal
Underneath the clash over rights, laws, and work rules, there was a deeper truth that the planters were sensing: The Age of Sugar was ending. On the one hand, the work on the plantations was now guided by a web of laws and rules that even an Indian coolie like Bechu could use to challenge the owners. Workers were individuals, not property. On the other hand, world sugar prices were plummeting. Owners no longer had the economic clout of being a mainstay of the economy. Instead, smaller plantations were going bankrupt. The old ways were simply not working anymore. Why were sugar prices falling? Because of competition from another part of the world. The evidence in this passage could best be described as
logical evidence showing that sugar farming was changing because of laws and low prices.
The Indian coolies and the ex-slaves, who resented these newcomers flooding into the colonies and driving down wages, were instant rivals. This was convenient for the planters—who were skilled at the game of divide and rule. The planters lumped their workers into two distinct but equally nasty stereotypes: Former slaves were described as lazy, whereas Indians were called meek, docile children. "You may have work and plenty of it for a black man and a coloured man, and they will not do it," claimed planter W. Alleyne Ireland. He conveniently ignored the fact that the ex-slaves wanted to work their own land, not labor for their former owners. The overseers praised the Indians' meekness but also held them in contempt. The Indian, one overseer claimed, "possesses the low, cringing and abject habit common to his nationality." What evidence do the authors include to support the central idea that Indian workers and formerly enslaved people became rivals?
logical evidence that Indian workers and formerly enslaved people did not get along with one another because wages went down
An introductory section that sets up a lengthy text is a
prologue.
What is the central idea of a text?
the main point the author is trying to make
What is the purpose of the heading in this passage? MARC It was a typically hot, dry day in Jerusalem. Marina and I were sitting on a sun-warmed stone patio when I learned my family's sugar story. A cousin of mine was filling in a bit of our history that had always puzzled me. My father's family came from Ukraine, then part of the Russian Empire, where his father, Solomon, the grand rabbi of Kiev, was the latest in a long line of rabbis that stretched back to the 1300s. Solomon was a forward-thinking rabbi who helped make bridges between the Jewish community and the Christians. He knew that change was coming, and he committed himself to building what was to become the land of Israel. My grandfather moved his family to Tel Aviv, where he became one of the leaders of the Jewish community.
to distinguish who is telling the story
What is the purpose of this text? We don't know exactly what Nina's grandfather's invention did, but as the story goes, he found a way to give raw beet sugar sparkling hues. People from Russia to the cafés of Vienna could now buy cheap and attractive sugar produced on European soil. Serfs were much like slaves, since they had no choice about where they lived or worked. Yet Nina's grandfather made so much money from his invention that he was able to buy his freedom from his owner.
to inform readers about the grandfather's role in creating beet sugar
Which statements best describe the author's purpose for writing this passage? Nina was always a mysterious figure in the family: beautiful as a movie star, cosmopolitan and elegant, with wide Slavic cheeks. She spoke only Russian, though she lived much of her adult life in Tel Aviv. There were rumors that she came from nobility and that she had once been very rich. She and Avram were thought of as a glamorous couple—he the charming man with his head in the clouds (in Yiddish the word for that kind of person is luftmensh, "air man''), she the mysterious beauty who had given up everything to be with him.Which statements best describe the author's purpose for writing this passage?
to present background information about Nina to intrigue the reader with details about Nina
What is the purpose of the cause-and-effect structure of this passage? In the Age of Sugar, Europeans bought a product made thousands of miles away that was less expensive than the honey from down the road. That was possible only because sugar set people in motion all across the world—millions of them as slaves, in chains; a few in search of their fortunes. A perfect taste made possible by the most brutal labor: That is the dark story of sugar.
to show how the desire for sugar led to slavery to reveal that the reason for sugar's low price was slavery