Skip to main content

Member Reviews

A personal chronicle that weaves together memoir, family history and colonial-era storytelling. Ambitious and very long, the narrative is structured in three sections, with the first being the author’s own personal reflections and experiences, the second delvng into the Baillie family roots and their ties to the East India Company, and the third, which is the most interesting, draws form the letters written by the five brothers during their service. These letters recount their experiences during pivotal historical events such as the Indian Mutiny, as well as their daily lives. The book offers a valuable resource for those interested in colonial history but my goodness, it’s tedious, and I found myself skipping large chunks. It rambles, it’s disjointed and none of the brothers truly comes alive. Pity, as it could have been so much more in the hands of a better writer.

Was this review helpful?

I have been fascinated by India for such a long time, so I was really keen to read this. What a disappointment!

The author's rambling style leads to a disjointed book with no sense of cohesion. Part 1 is really just a lengthy list of the author, John Baillie's achievements. He has attempted to write it as an “obituary” about himself, which might be a novel approach, but was just so tedious to get through, and frankly, not in the least bit interesting to me. The whole thing, while obviously well researched is presented in a particularly dry, disjointed and, frankly, uninteresting way. I gave up halfway through Part 11.

Was this review helpful?

I was quite excited to read Five Brothers in India and to learn more about the Baillie family. I regret that I found this book disjointed, uninteresting, and amateurish. The three sections are unrelated. The first is autobiographical, recording a moderately successful naval and finance career; littered with anecdotes and long passages of correspondence, it did not hold my attention. The second section seems bizarre, ostensibly a discussion of faith, it promulgates a bizarre thesis about Christian origins . The third section has some primary source value but not enough to redeem this scattershot affair.

Was this review helpful?