Which of the following best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes? (1 point)
• Neither of them was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach.
• 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 routes were equally significant -each in is 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.
The third option, "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," best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes.
The best explanation for the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes is that the Indian Ocean basin was more significant. This is because it connected the Middle East and parts of Africa with Asia, specifically China, and it had important goods such as silk and porcelain.
To determine which of the options best explains the relative significance of the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean trade routes, we need to consider the information provided in each option.
Option 1 states that neither of the trade routes was significant because both were limited in whom they could reach. This option dismisses the significance of both trade routes, which is not supported by historical evidence.
Option 2 suggests that the Indian Ocean trade route was more significant because it connected the Middle East and parts of Africa with Asia, specifically China, and it involved important goods such as silk and porcelain. This option recognizes the extensive reach and valuable goods exchanged along the Indian Ocean trade route, making it a strong contender.
Option 3 asserts that the routes were equally significant in their own ways, as they both contributed to significant cultural developments along the routes, and "worth cannot be measured simply by the goods that were traded." This option considers the cultural impact of both trade routes, which is a valid consideration when assessing their significance.
Option 4 argues that the trans-Saharan trade route was more significant because it involved valuable resources like salt, gold, and ivory. This option acknowledges the valuable commodities traded along the trans-Saharan trade route but does not provide as much information about its overall reach and cultural impact compared to the other options.
Based on the given options and their explanations, option 2 - the Indian Ocean trade route being more significant due to its extensive reach and involvement of valuable goods - seems to be the best choice as it provides the most comprehensive explanation.