In recent years, there has emerged a body of historical writings focusing on local and regional history in different parts of Iran. The local historians like all historians seek to explain what happened in these regions' past and why it happened as it did by reconstructing past events with the help of the related documents. The authors of these historical writings explicitly or implicitly challenge the existing historiography of their regions. They question the theoretical presuppositions, modes of documentation, interpretive strategies, modes of explanation through which national history has concealed historical truths about their region, and in doing so obscured the contribution of the region's past to formation of Iranian national identity. The appearance of local historiography is more obvious in the southern provinces of Khuzestan and Bousher than any other places in Iran. The local and regional historiographies define the particular historical identity of the regions and try to discover the point of convergence of the local and national identity within a new narrative of national history. These local and regional historiographical endeavors that critically evaluate the historiography of Iran in general and of the region in particular entail important epistemological and pragmatic problems to be discussed and clarified. By gathering and ranking different historical objects, as less or more important evidences in a new historical narrative these new historiographical trends like all historical writings claim to historical truth about a particular historical event, a series of events or a period. We may not be able discover the truth value of every statement in the local historigraphical accounts but their pragmatic implications can be evaluated. It is important to note that these historigraphical disputes are not only about the facts, but also about the meaning of the facts that are construed through different strategies of interpretation and ideological preferences. Like all historiographical traditions local historiography employs perfectly conventional criteria of relevance, evidence and rational inference, but they cannot hide their ideological biases. And in this way, local historiography becomes both the site of historical contestation with national historiography and an attempt to reach historical convergence with this same historiography towards a new definition of the national identity. This paper will investigate on what grounds and by whose cognitive authority can we validate or repudiate the claims of these local historiographies to historical truth, and to what extent can we reveal the relation between their historiography and their politics.