 We must wonder why Hempel did not define that \(C\) is a cause of a particular event \(E\) iff there is a DN explanation of \(E\) such that \(E\) is the explanandum, \(C\) is among the antecedent conditions, all antecedent conditions precede the occurrence of \(E\), and all laws are laws of succession. Presumably, his interest in an analysis of causation was limited.