Established History Or Controversial History?
It’s not really a religion-related question but I don’t see why you want to look at history in black and white. I was taught in my O level classes that British rule both developed the subcontinent and exploited the natives. I was also taught that Aurangzeb was a practicising pious Muslim that would pray before a battle but also a poor ruler that spent more time fighting over the throne and failed many campaigns. Then I was taught by my books and teachers to verify the evidence and pick a point of view of history that is most supported by evidence. Doesn’t matter if your view is absolutely true or not, as long as you have the arguments, you are allowed to keep that view while respectfully accept alternative opinion exists based on the alternative arguments and you would elaborate why you didn’t accept the alternative opinion. It’s no different in case of other fields as well.