Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: East India Company should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part three: Land, trade and war within BD Restoration England, 1660-1685 and directly supports Study land, including East India Company powers, Bombay, Hudson Bay, Tangier, Captain Henry Morgan and Jamaica. Check this by using evidence, provenance, date, event, individual, policy, consequence; do not choose a distractor simply because it sounds historical.

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 land, including East India Company powers, Bombay, Hudson Bay, Tangier, Captain Henry Morgan and Jamaica. 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.