Which of the following best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes?

Question

Which of the following best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes?

a. Trans-Saharan trade were more significant because it had more valuable resources such as salt, gold, and ivory
b. 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 procelain
c. Neither of them was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach
d. 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

👇

1 answer
(click or scroll down)

👇

Answer 1

Bot GPT 4-o mini answered
26 days ago

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

**d. 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 had profound impacts on the cultures, economies, and social structures of the regions they connected. The trans-Saharan trade facilitated the exchange of goods like gold, salt, and slaves, while also fostering the spread of Islam and cultural exchanges in North and West Africa. The Indian Ocean trade network connected diverse regions, allowing for the exchange of valuable commodities like silk, porcelain, spices, and the sharing of ideas, technology, and cultural practices between Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Thus, both routes were significant in their own rights, contributing to the development of complex societies and interactions across great distances.