[qwytw]

While you're right about the trade between Europe and India. Rome and Constantinople we famously supplied with grain shipped hundreds of miles from Sicily, North Africa and Egypt. Even in pre Roman times there was extensive international trade, at its hight Athens were relient on grain shipments from the northern Black Sea coast. While pretty much everything besides basic foodstuffs and cheapest cloth was considered a luxury back then there were extensive trade networks between ancient city states.

Arguably the deurbanization both in India and Europe was to a large degree caused by climate change following the end of the Roman Warm Period.

[hnaccount_rng]

The difference there is method of transportation. Yes bulk transport was possible, but only by sea not by caravan. And even then it’s relatively short distances. Which would imply that India should have been “shielded” by the continued existence of the eastern Roman Empire.

And yes definitely there were trade networks. But they consisted of relatively few but high value goods. Most of which populations could do without. However there is the point that cities formed around goods that were traded. So I’m no longer as certain that there is no correlation