What caution is necessary while reading traditions of Lalitaditya Muktapida's campaigns?

Correct answer: Separating exaggeration from historical fact

The direct answer is A: separate exaggeration from historical fact. Lalitaditya Muktapida was a powerful eighth-century ruler of Kashmir, and accounts of his campaigns, especially later regional traditions, may describe victories in a highly expansive or heroic manner. A careful student should not accept every claim automatically. The reasoning is: identify the source; ask when and why it was written; compare its claims with inscriptions, archaeology, and other records; then distinguish probable events from literary praise or exaggeration. Option A is correct because source criticism is necessary when reading grand conquest traditions. Option B is wrong because Lalitaditya was not a Harappan ruler; the Harappan civilisation belongs many centuries earlier. Option C is wrong because a Mauryan mahamatra was an administrative officer, not the identity of this Kashmiri king. Option D is wrong because a Chola devadasi was a woman associated with temple service, not a male ruler of Kashmir. The caution does not mean all traditions are false; it means evidence must be examined carefully. Memory cue: impressive victory lists require “source, date, purpose, comparison.”