If all other examples of "histories" from the ancient world are slanted and exaggerated, why shouldn't one assume the same of Jewish history until evidence bears out differently?
You're kidding, right?
A) evidence *has* borne out differently as with the previously mentioned Babylonian court. B) Equating Holy Writ with 'histories' is the equivalent of equating slips of paper with 'cash'. No one structured a society or founded a religion that survives to this day based on the writings of Josephus. C) Ancient Jews intended to be different from their neighbours. Why presume that's not the casse here? D) because no one has yet provided a definitive example of such exaggeration.