Have historians responded to Raju's critique? C. K. Raju has made some outrageous criticisms of the traditional take on Euclid in particular and Western history in general. Yet he has a book published on the subject with an apparently respectable publisher in India. Have modern historians of the classical period responded to his critique?
Note. One of the responders mentioned a helpful review by Ferreiros here.

The articles by Raju have a conspirational flavor. The history of Indian mathematics is still an uncharted territory. There are more informative unbiased articles, for instance, there are much deeper and less biased studies I've read:
A. Seidenberg, “The Origin of Mathematics,” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 18, 301-342 (1978).
S.C.Kak, “Science in Ancient India,” in  Ananya:
A Portrait of India, Ed. by S.R.Sridhar and N.K.Matto
(AIA, New York, 1997), pp. 399–420.
