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

Question

A. Trans-Saharan trade was more significant because it had more valuable resources such as salt, gold, and ivory.
B. Neither of them was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach.
C. 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.
D. 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.

Answer 1

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

C. 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 critical roles in their respective regions by facilitating not only the exchange of valuable goods but also the spread of ideas, culture, and innovations. Each route had unique characteristics and impacts that cannot be easily compared in terms of value of the goods alone.