Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: parliamentary government should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part one: Germany and the growth of democracy within AB Germany, 1890-1945: Democracy and dictatorship and directly supports Study Kaiser Wilhelm and the difficulties of ruling Germany, including parliamentary government, Prussian militarism, industrialisation, social reform, socialism and Navy Laws. Check this by using evidence, provenance, date, event, individual, policy, consequence; do not choose a distractor simply because it sounds historical.

The correct option is parliamentary government should be explained before. This MCQ is about Which option separates cause and consequence, not just general recall. The correct option works because it matches the period context of Paper 1 Section A: Period studies and uses the same evidence base as Study Kaiser Wilhelm and the difficulties of ruling Germany, including parliamentary government, Prussian militarism, industrialisation, social reform, socialism and Navy Laws. The rejected options are weaker: 1) A source comment with no provenance.; 2) A long-term cause treated as a result.; 3) A similarity presented as a difference.. To decide between them, students should identify, support, test, reject the option against chronology, evidence and the learning objective, then keep evidence separate from opinion and interpretation.