The sub-continent's histories may well be one of the most misled and misinterpreted ones in the world.

Part of the reason for that is, most histories now referred for research into the region were products of 'darbaars' (royal courts), meaning they were written by commissioned authors who were favourites of the kings, maharajas or other persons in power.

Such histories are bound to be overflowing with praise for the ruler of the time. These are not the people's histories; they only speak of the victories, generosity and other great deeds of the rulers that usually amount to a bowl full of lies. So no, they can never be taken as national histories.