Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: Vikings 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 invasion, including Vikings and Anglo-Saxons, reasons for Viking invasions, creation of the Danelaw, Alfred and Wessex, King Cnut, Emma of Normandy. 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 Vikings should be explained before judging. 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 invasion, including Vikings and Anglo-Saxons, reasons for Viking invasions, creation of the Danelaw, Alfred and Wessex, King Cnut, Emma of Normandy. 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.