The present study aims to introduce a methodological model for the critical reading of history university textbooks through identifying ideological strategies in these texts. The retrieval of these components shows that although authors use some expressive techniques to provide a realistic representation of historical actors and events in the medieval period of Iran history, in practice, they transfer certain evaluative attitudes and readings from the past to their readers. Using Van Dijk’s discourse analysis tools, this paper aims to present an explanatory and descriptive approach towards the normal attitudes of the native and non-native authors to the history of Iran in the Samanid, Ghaznavid, Saljuqid, and Qarakhanid periods. For this purpose, the four above dynasties that have been reflected in four native textbooks and two non-native reference books – as data corpus – were quantitatively and comparatively reviewed. Therefore, the native and non-native history books were studied in terms of the ideological strategies that have been applied in their meaning, style and syntax. According to the statistics, it became clear that the use of ideological strategies is inevitable in history narration. Also, by analyzing the ideological strategies in the text, it became clear that the differences that exist in the views of the Iranian and foreign authors as “us” and “them” towards Iranian history can affect the reading and representation of the historical events. In the narration of the native history writers more emphasis is placed on the positive characteristics of Iranians, such as their braveries and valiances, while in the writings of non-narrative writers, their negative qualities, such as class differences and the conflicts between Iranian ethnic groups, are reflected.