Good morning RD1,
I must confess, I have in possession the said volumes and skim read in part the juicy bits. That too, if task at hand would deem it necessary, but otherwise, seldom do I read for leisure or as an informative historical account to further knowledge. I treat it as an overview, insofar, reconstructing the human past. Bearing in mind of course that compression and selection are the historians [MAM] prerogative that are not always self-evident, in that, remote centuries may be ignored on account 'current affairs has a decided priority'. That is not to say, MAM hasn't done justice to Sikh History, he has to the best of his ability, but there is much more. The fact that he rounded-up a good number of scholars, prominent personalities at the time and in general, himself an over enthusiastic who had fallen in love with Sikhi deserves credit, regardless.
History as an academic discipline has a subjective element compounded by theoretical reasoning, emotional framework therefore is indispensable for correct reconstruction. Who'd be more befitting to tell it as it really was, he who is alien to culture and society of an era under construction or he/she who is an inhabitant of the culture and society to be reconstructed ? Your call, enjoy the read !
Sikh writers such as bhai Vir Singh and Santokh Singh might snatch your fancy for a near-perfect account of the "Singh that was, is and will be the King" in this so called social society. They spike it up as it really was and is - a nation of soldier-saints, God fearing social species.
Good day !
