It emphasizes how severely the bubonic plague affected people and how quickly it killed them. ... It suggests that Europe could have easily avoided the plague if they had not let the ship in to the port.
I think it would be the 2nd one?
The narrator from Edgar Allan Poe's "The Black Cat", by deciding to plea "not guilty due to insanity", is doing something many people charged with murder do: blaming their own acts on a certain "demonic" mindset, which can be caused by evil spirits or even drugs (legal or illegal). The narrator has a history of alcohol abuse, which, according to his own testimony throughout the short story, led him to cut one of his cat's eyes out of its socket. He'd also been violent to his wife, not only verbally, and said he'd committed violent acts precisely because of their malignant essence. This man is no good. Therefore, there's no point in validating his plea of "not guilty due to insanity" and he should indeed be charged with murder. After all, he killed his wife with the strike of an axe upon her head, just because she wanted to stop him from killing their cat. As the narrator admits, he was then possessed by unstoppable anger, and that's not a reason for claiming to have done anything due to insanity at all.
The correct answer to which detail in the excerpt best supports the author's opinion that Kalhat is a secure city is "The Malik of Hormuz fears no one when he is in Kalhat".
The author states that <em>an important person </em>like the Malik of Hormuz goes to Kalhat whenever he is<em> "at war with neighbors more powerful than himself"</em> because the city<em> "is strongly built and situated"</em>, thus, <em>he feels entirely protected from enemies and fears no one.</em> By doing that, <em>the author supports his opinion that Kalhat is a secure city, after all, an important and influent character trusts in its safety.</em> So, the correct answer is to which detail in the excerpt best supports the author's opinion about Kalhat's security is " "The Malik of Hormuz fears no one when he is in Kalhat".
The correct answer couldn't be <em>"Ships from India frequent the port in Kalhat"</em> because that <em>doesn't imply, without a context, that the city is safe. </em>That statement could even, if inserted in a <em>different context</em>, imply that due to the frequency of ships in Kalhat it could be considered dangerous. It's not the case, because that author drives the reader into understanding that the port is safe and protected. Still, <em>this sentence alone doesn't support the author's opinion about the fact that the city is secure.</em> Therefore, the correct answer couldn't be "Ships from India frequent the port in Kalhat".
The correct answer couldn't be <em>"A large number of war horses are shipped from Kalhat"</em> because, although this statement <em>might convey that the city is disposed of many war horses and that could mean strong military activity</em>, it <em>doesn't relate</em> this fact with Kalhat's security. So, this answer doesn't support the author's opinion that Kalhat is a secure city.
The correct answer couldn't be <em>"Spices and other goods are sold in Kalhat"</em> because this detail doesn't relate to Kalhat's security, it is <em>much more an observation about the city's commerce</em>. Hence, this answer doesn't support the author's opinion about the city's security.
