Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: Norman Conquest should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part one: The Normans: conquest and control within BA Norman England, c1066-c1100 and directly supports Study causes of Norman Conquest, including Edward the Confessor's death, claimants and claims. 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 Norman Conquest 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 B: British depth studies including the historic environment and uses the same evidence base as Study causes of Norman Conquest, including Edward the Confessor's death, claimants and claims. 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.