How accurate is the Da Vinci Code?

[hugoboss]

I'm in the middle of the Da Vinci Code - so without giving away any vital plot - can anyone tell me: how accurate is the historical element to this book? i.e. the parts about the Bible, the Grail the Da Vincis etc?

thanks

[LeMarchand]

Extremely inaccurate.

It's a fun book, but I would take most of its theories with a barrel of salt.

[dafyd]

Everything he talks about exists - but most (if not all) of the theories he talks about he has made up. The whole Opus Dei thing is absolute balderdash - as they have said on several occasions.

He researched it very well, and most things are fairly feasible, but the background is pretty much complete tosh.

[RevShirls]

It's a great book to read. I really enjoyed it. None of the theories in it are new. They were made popular in the 1980s in a book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". One of the co-authors of this book was on the verge of suing Dan Brown for using lots of their book's material.

This may be new stuff to many but the theories were certainly being discussed in our theology classes at university in the 1980s. Many of them are groundless but it is true that Mary Magdalene's reputation was smeared. In the Bible she is never referred to as a prostitute but in 591 AD "Pope" Gregory declared that Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany (Lazarus� sister), and the sinner of Luke 7: 37 are all the same. Hence, the origin of the view that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. 

For more information on whether Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, here is a link to one of the former questions in Answerbank:

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/History-and-Myths/Question95729.html

[natalie_1982]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/4356945.stm

Thought you might find this interesting - it's in the news today

[JOEYSHABADO]

ROFl, I just read that link. 'Monsignor urges readers to exercise prudence'. Who the hell do these idiots think they are and what convinces them that they have the right to tell me when and where I should exercise 'prudence' when reading a novel.

My on breasts really gets it. Rearrange.

[natalie_1982]

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/People_and_Places/Question97669.html

Thought this may interest you too, it's a question I asked about Dan Brown/ Da Vinci a few weeks ago and there are more links on there to sites including Opus Dei.

[natalie_1982]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/4357493.stm

Sorry for all these links, but this is new and leads on from the report I posted this morning.

[Hgrove]

The following site has a discussion of inaccuracies in the book that may interest you (perhaps after you have finished reading it): http://www.lisashea.com/hobbies/art/

I have to say I enjoyed it whilst not taking it too seriously. 

[Gevs1966]

The whole thing is a load of rubbish and has been proved to be again and again in various investigations and documentaries since the holy blood and the holy grail book was released in about 1982. Certain things in the book are based on historical writings but none of the real dates coincide with each other and events portrayed are actually hundreds of years apart.

One of the authors of the Holy Blood and The Holy Grail (can't remember his name now) also acknowledges that the whole thing is complete rubbish.

 

The Priory of Sion was made up by three French guys in the 70's to make it look like one of them had a bllod link to the French Royal family and was therefore heir to the French throne (if they still had on). After the Holy grail book came out and the guys who made up the Priory of sion realised the implications of their hoax they were very quick to come clean!

 

There are loads of other examples to rubbish the books claims we could be here foerever, but I can't be bothered to write them all out.

[hobsonbear]

any author writing fiction will have researched their subject, for example murder/crime books aren't necessarily true but the author would have to have researched autopsies, police matters etc.  to give an insight to their readers.  same with historical authors, they weren't there at the time but they research the actual history of what they are writing about and weave a story around it (a lot of 'factual' books do this as well.)  enjoy 'the da vinci code' and then read 'angels and demons' which imho is better and i took a trip to rome to follow the story.

h

[natalie_1982]

I agree, I thought Angels and Demons was better - it was slower to get into, but I felt the middle and ending outshone the Da Vinci code.