Question

Which of the following best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes?(1 point) Responses The Indian Ocean basin was more significant because it connected the Middle East and parts of Africa with Asia, specifically China, and it had important goods such as silk and porcelain. The Indian Ocean basin was more significant because it connected the Middle East and parts of Africa with Asia, specifically China, and it had important goods such as silk and porcelain. Neither of them was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach. Neither of them was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach. The routes were equally significant—each in its own way—as they both contributed to significant cultural developments along the routes, and worth cannot be measured simply by the goods that were traded. The routes were equally significant—each in its own way—as they both contributed to significant cultural developments along the routes, and worth cannot be measured simply by the goods that were traded. Trans-Saharan trade was more significant because it had more valuable resources such as salt, gold, and ivory.

Answer 1

The best explanation of the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes is:

The routes were equally significant—each in its own way—as they both contributed to significant cultural developments along the routes, and worth cannot be measured simply by the goods that were traded.

Both trade routes played vital roles in connecting different cultures, facilitating trade of diverse goods, and influencing social, economic, and political developments across regions. The Indian Ocean trade routes allowed for interactions between Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, while the trans-Saharan routes connected North Africa with sub-Saharan Africa, allowing for the exchange of valuable resources and cultural ideas.