Which of the following best describes why Mehmed Il continued to trade with the Genoese despite their alliance with the Byzantines? (1 point)
O Genoa was also a Muslim kingdom and its similar faith made it a natural ally.
O Mehmed II understood the importance and benefits of maintaining trade with the Genoese, just as the Byzantines understood.
The Genoese betrayed the Byzantines, so the Ottomans trusted them.
They were already trading partners
The best answer is "O Mehmed II understood the importance and benefits of maintaining trade with the Genoese, just as the Byzantines understood."
Option 1 is not an accurate description as Genoa was not a Muslim kingdom. Option 2 is the most appropriate answer. Mehmed II understood the significance and advantages of maintaining trade with the Genoese, just as the Byzantines did. The Genoese had not betrayed the Byzantines, so it cannot be reliably stated that the Ottomans trusted them. Finally, there is no mention in the question of the Ottomans and the Genoese already being trading partners, so option 4 cannot be considered as the best choice. Therefore, the best answer is option 2: Mehmed II understood the importance and benefits of maintaining trade with the Genoese, just as the Byzantines understood.
To determine which of the options best describes why Mehmed II continued to trade with the Genoese despite their alliance with the Byzantines, we need to analyze each option and evaluate its relevance.
Option 1 states that Genoa was also a Muslim kingdom, suggesting that their similar faith made them a natural ally. However, in this context, the religious affiliation is not mentioned as a driving factor, and there is no evidence to support this claim. Hence, we can exclude this option.
Option 2 suggests that Mehmed II understood the importance and benefits of maintaining trade with the Genoese, just as the Byzantines did. This option is plausible as it takes into account the significance of trade and the mutual benefits it brings. Maintaining trading relationships can be advantageous for both parties involved, regardless of their political alliances.
Option 3 states that the Genoese betrayed the Byzantines, so the Ottomans trusted them. However, this option is not supported by historical records. While the Byzantines did have conflicts with the Genoese, there is no evidence to suggest that the Ottomans trusted the Genoese solely based on this betrayal.
Option 4 suggests that the Ottomans and the Genoese were already trading partners. This option is the most plausible as it logically explains why Mehmed II continued to trade with the Genoese. If they were already engaged in trading relationships that were beneficial to both parties, it would make sense for Mehmed II to continue these business dealings.
Based on this analysis, option 4 ("They were already trading partners") is the most likely and best description of why Mehmed II continued to trade with the Genoese despite their alliance with the Byzantines.