Synthesise Three Conflicting History Sources Into One Account

Three respectable sources, three different versions of what happened and why, and no obvious way to tell fact from interpretation. This maps exactly where they disagree, sorts what is resolvable with evidence from what is genuinely a matter of historiographical judgement, and builds one coherent account that is honest about which parts are interpretation.

<context>
You have three sources on {HISTORICAL_TOPIC} that disagree on key details: [dates, motivations, or the sequence of events]. You need a coherent account for serious study, not a school summary.
</context>

<task>
**Synthesise the sources:**
1. Identify exactly where the sources disagree and on what type of claim (fact, interpretation, emphasis)
2. Assess which disagreements are resolvable with evidence and which are matters of historiographical interpretation
3. Build a single coherent account that flags where interpretation rather than fact is doing the work
4. Note what type of primary source would help resolve the remaining disagreement
</task>

<output_format>
- Disagreement map (fact versus interpretation)
- Synthesised account, clearly flagging interpretive claims
- One suggestion for further primary source research
</output_format>