Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: Angevin Empire should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part one: Conquered and conquerors within AC Britain: Migration, empires and the people: c790 to the present day and directly supports Study a Norman Kingdom and Angevin Empire, including England-France relationships, Henry II, invasion of Ireland and losses under King John. 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 Angevin Empire 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 2 Section A: Thematic studies and uses the same evidence base as Study a Norman Kingdom and Angevin Empire, including England-France relationships, Henry II, invasion of Ireland and losses under King John. 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.