I haven't actually read 'The Da Vinci Code', but from what I hear, it is liably truthful at least in places. In 1986 I stood in a valley in France - the celebrated Rennes-le-chateau - at a site painted in the background of one of da Vinci's paintings of 'The Virgin of the rocks' (he did two)...an actual rock tomb that does exist in the valley, and thought by an elect few to be the tomb of Christ. That's all I wish to contribute.

can someone please tell me what the da vinci code is about?
what is so amazing about it?

The places described in the book do exist in France but that's about it. This book is based on "The Holy blood, Holy grail" published long time ago. At least the idea about Jesus Christ being married to Mary Magdalene and starting a bloodline of European kings is quite similar in both books...

Yeah, the books about how da vinci left clues in his pantings about mary magdeline and Jesus getting married, and running off together. In the beggining the author puts the word "FACT!" so now everyone thinks that the book is just that... "fact"... when in fact it is not fact... it is indeed fiction.... anywho, some places in the book are real, just like how santa is from the north pole... the north pole is real... santa is not.

it is very well written. it makes people think. That's why everyone likes it so much.

It's not a true story!! It's fiction..

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
With The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown masterfully concocts an intelligent and lucid thriller that marries the gusto of an international murder mystery with a collection of fascinating esoteria culled from 2,000 years of Western history.

A murder in the silent after-hour halls of the Louvre museum reveals a sinister plot to uncover a secret that has been protected by a clandestine society since the days of Christ. The victim is a high-ranking agent of this ancient society who, in the moments before his death, manages to leave gruesome clues at the scene that only his granddaughter, noted cryptographer Sophie Neveu, and Robert Langdon, a famed symbologist, can untangle. The duo become both suspects and detectives searching for not only Neveu's grandfather's murderer but also the stunning secret of the ages he was charged to protect. Mere steps ahead of the authorities and the deadly competition, the mystery leads Neveu and Langdon on a breathless flight through France, England, and history itself. Brown (Angels and Demons) has created a page-turning thriller that also provides an amazing interpretation of Western history. Brown's hero and heroine embark on a lofty and intriguing exploration of some of Western culture's greatest mysteries--from the nature of the Mona Lisa's smile to the secret of the Holy Grail. Though some will quibble with the veracity of Brown's conjectures, therein lies the fun. The Da Vinci Code is an enthralling read that provides rich food for thought. --Jeremy Pugh

I don't remember reading that in the book, but that is fascinating just the same. Where did you hear that?

Dan Brown, the author, states quite clearly at the begining of the novel, items that are fact. I got the illustrated version, it has great pictures of items in the books that are real, paintings, buildings, etc.

Wonderful fun read!

the places, that secret society, and the artwork are real, as far as i know. thats about where the fact stops. some stuff Brown puts in there, especially said by Teabing, one of the major characters, is wrong. as an example, Brown has Teabing say that Mithras, a persian and later roman god, was buried in a rock tomb. Mithras was born out of rock, but to my knowledge, never died.

the book is an exciting read and does make you think.

I'm gonna get that when the price goes down

If your thinking abilities are as limited as your reading skills, I'm not shocked to hear that you did indeed think that "The Da Vinci Code" is not fictional (No offense intended ). Im getting tired of people bashing the writer for saying that his book is fact. If you read the whole fact page in the beginning, the writer states that some elements in his story are based on existing items/paintings/organizations. The story is fictional.

Having said that, I want to say that im a big fan of the book. The way the writer combines historical/fictional fact is great. Having been to the Louvre, Im able to recognize many of the locations and paintings, so I just love it

do u have a book the title is de vinci code, is it arealy true that the monalisa is a picture of satan or an demonic painting and de vinci is an antichrist......pls guide me in this mystery....

The Book is a historical fiction some of it is true and a majority of the places in the book are actual places... However the book is a work of fiction. None the less give it a read its a great book

some says it is a fiction some says its a fact iam realy comfused, imust read that book,goshhh

i know i will sound stupid but this is the first time i have heard of this code, from what others are saying on here it must be interesting but what is it all about... the holy blood ? ? ?

IMHO it is unfair to automatically brush off reasonable conclusions because they are referenced in a work of fiction. It is a fact that the Priory IS a secret organisation associated with the Knights of Templar. It is a fact that Jesus was associated with a woman named Mary Magdelene. It is a fact that Constantine of Rome CONVERTED to Christianity and was once a Pagan. It is a fact that Christianity has suppressed the role of women (along with most other popular religions). It is a fact that Isis was once referred in an ancient pictogram as L'ISA. It is a fact that the Isis' counterpart was Amon (Mona Lisa). It is a fact that Da Vinci was a talented artist who knew how to draw differences between a woman and a man (for those who believe the Last Supper depicts 13 men, think again.. Mary sits next to jesus who is wearing the exact same colors as Jesus only in opposite order..) It is a fact that in the last supper there is an unaccounted for hand holding a dagger. The Golden Ration (PHI) has been widely considered to be an extra-ordinary number (http://www.geocities.com/robinhuiscool/Goldenratio.html) . In other words, nothing new. It is a fact that the word crucifix means torture in ancient texts. It is a fact (in the Dead Sea Scrolls) that Peter questioned Jesus' relationship with Mary.

What this all means? Well, IMHO the bible was written by man. I believe alot of what religion was, and is, is purely political. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume Constantine did burn sections of the old testament to hide Jesus' true relationship with Mary (I believe they were actually married and had a child). I believe the Holy Grail is not some cup but is a bloodline. And I don't think Mary Magdelene was a whore, but the person Jesus turned to to continue his church (but usurped by Peter)..

My $.02

yeah really tell me too

Kind of off topic but still on the life of Jesus check out Rabbi Jesus: an intimate biography, Wrote by Bruce Chilton. It has Bible references (in context) and deals with the birth and life of Jesus with all his perks tossed in. Definitely informative and an eye opener.

I repeat, I have stood at a rock tomb clearly painted at the top of both versions Of Leo's Virgin of the rocks. Furthermore, the entire painting is a map that can be placed over the rennes Valley landscape. I've said enough now...

just a few comments. if you look closely at the last supper, that hand holding the dagger belongs to the 4th man from the left with a grey beard and hair, wearing blue and leaning over and wispering something to the person you claim is mary mag. here is a web site with some excellent highres pics of the last supper: http://milano.arounder.com/PROJECTS/SANTA_...A_DELLE_GRAZIE/ take a look for yourself.
it would be incredibly hard for the dead sea scrolls to mention anything about jesus. most of them were produced before jesus lived, and the jews who wrote them probably didnt care enough about jesus to write about him. but if i am wrong, please point me to the fragment that contains Peter's questioning of Jesus.
i highly doubt that constantine burned anything of the old testament. even if he did, he couldnt get all of the copies. and why would anything about jesus' life be in the old testament?

the da vinci code is about a harvard professor who is called to france to help in investigating the murder of the curator of the louve (sp?) who left clues to a secret he had kept for a secret society. along the way, dan brown makes various claims, some are grounded in reality, others are not.
after comparing the da vinci to some of browns other books, i have decided that they are recycled literary garbage. all of his books have the same plot line. starts with a murder, some kind of love intrest involved, some more murders, and a sudden, last minute plot twist that leads to the murderer being the person you least expected. but thats just my opinion.

Redeye back. I would just like to add that he cave/tomb da Vinci paints in both his versions of Virgin of the rocks, is also one as the same as painted by Teniers in his 'Temptation of St Anthony', except it is from a different angle, but still clearly shows the two points of entry where in Leo's depiction we see the Virgin kneeling. It exists, and I have been there (although it was filled in with soil and rubble....)

i finally got to buy the book two days ago and i just finished it, it is a good book yes and it does make sense in some ways but i still believe that the book is mostly fiction or just merely suggestions of the author about the holy grail.
i like his version though.

what about his other book named angels and demons, its with the same character (Langdon) but this time about the illuminati. im thinking of getting it also but is it worth buying? has anyone read that one?

angels and demons is pretty much the same thing as da vinci code. just replace the characters and setting from da vinci code and you get angels and demons. other than its huge numbers of parallels, angels and demons is just as exciting as da vinci code.

Hi Redeye,

That’s an interesting claim. Why do you believe the painting is a map? Can you show us any kind of proof that the painting can be placed over the Rennes Valley landscape? I was looking for the Teniers painting of the Temptation of St Anthony, but there seem to be various versions out there. Do you mean THIS one?

Also SLL, great site with the close ups of the last supper, thanks for that. I always thought it was a floating hand with a dagger for some reason lol but you’re right it clearly belongs to the bearded man. (Peter I believe)

HEres the real scope behind the Davinci Code. Its a work of fantasy. The places exist, some of the people exist, and a few other things are true. The vast majority of it is grossly misrepresented. For example its a fact that no evidence links Davinci to the Priori De Sion. In fact no evidence even proves the Priori existed in Da Vinci's life time. There are two groups that have used the name. One a group of priests in the 1300s who had no particular links to the templars. The other a completely modern group that claims most of the false history people now associate with the order. No evidence shows it existed prior to the twentieth century.

Its also a fact that there is no credible evidence that Christ married Mary Magdalene. Its not mentioned any where in the oldest known records of his life(which are the oldest pick up your Bible). Theres no evidence these were actually tampered with either. In fact the evidence clearly shows other wise. All but 11 passages in the four gospels have been repeated in the writtings of church fathers from the 1st and 2nd centuries with out the sort of refferences that support the idea extra information existed. The Mona Lisa was not a pagan godess she was in fact simply a Italian noble woman no real evidence suggests other wise. The Templars also had NOTHING to do with the grail and its not why they were hunted down. All that happened with the Templars is that a greedy French king orchestrated there destruction to avoid paying back his debts and to gain there land. Its no different then most of the other events of hte inquisition.

As for the grail itself its a complete and total myth. The first appearance of the Grail is in the 12th century and it wasn't even linked in any way to Christ or King Arthur. It was a plot device for midevil authors to tell stories with not an actual object. If you in fact read any of the gospels(gnostic or canonical) the grail is never mentioned once. The closest is the fact Christ used a cup during the last supper attaching any mystical signifigance to it came much, much later. As for Magdalene herself she was never mnimized by the early church. This is a feminist delusion unsupported by any actual records. Don't believe me? Read what the early church fathers said of her. Augustine and others talked about her with a real sense of awe. Several of them even said she was the second Eve who made up for the mistakes of the original as Christ made up for the mistakes of the first Adam. She was not combined with Mary of Bethany and the prostitute Mary to marginalize her but instead it was done to show she had an even more important role in the gospels then people thought.

IN conclusion Browne's book is a fairly well written peice of fiction. His attempt to support an anti christian liberal agenda is a complete failure.

>>Dan Brown, the author, states quite clearly at the begining of the novel, items that are fact. 


But not if you are reading the Italian version, there they specifically say it is all fiction - otherwise they would not allow it to be printed.

The Holy Grail is reputed to be the Sang Real, rather than the San Greal (Royal blood rather than Holy Grail). In fact it is both, because the 'cup' that contained the Royal Blood was the womb of Mary Magdelene. Thus Dan re-itterates the conclusion, already widely held, that Mary and Jesus were married and had children. But he does so in a very readable context that is bound to amuse and amaze.

However, he could have gone a lot further than this. He could have mentioned the Egyptian ancestry of Jesus and his religion. That the Judaic god Adhon was named after the Egyptian god Aton (Adjon). That most Judaic customs, including circumscision, were originally Egyptian. That Jesus was educated in Egypt. That he was a prince of Egypt, as was Moses (but in exile). That the term 'carpenter' comes from the common princely title of Setepenre, or Gods Carpenter. That, according to the old Judaic and Egyptian custom, Mary was not just Jesus' wife, but also his sister.


I could go on, but the subject is very deep and confusing to the novice...


Best regards
Ralph Ellis
Edfu Books

Thats quite funny. Jesus fled to Egypt to escape the persecution of Herod. He wasn't a Egyptian prince in fact he was a Hebrew King of the line of David and Solomon. The Bible lays his lineage down quite clearly.

As tot he Holy blood "translation" nonsense its really an ubsurdity. The first refferences to the Grail were refferences to a plate not a cup and had no connection to Christ.

>>Jesus fled to Egypt to escape the persecution of Herod. He wasn't a Egyptian prince
>>in fact he was a Hebrew King of the line of David and Solomon. The Bible lays his
>>lineage down quite clearly.


Indeed it does, and thus his lineage was direct from Egypt. Joseph was prime minister of all Egypt and high priest of Heliopolis. Moses was a prince of Egypt and and Egyptian army commander. Samuel was most probably a Samur (Samul) priest. People don't achieve these high positions without fully understanding the theology and language of Egypt.

The exodus from Egypt was most likely to have been a recorded historical event - the exodus of the Hyksos pharaohs from Egypt (see following). Undoubtedly, the origins of Judaism are firmly rooted in Egypt, which is why there are so many similarities - including the diety prohibitions, hair style (ringlets), wearing of earings, lunar calendar, cross symbology, Arks, flying scroll imagery (winged Ra), pyramid tombs, monotheism (of Akhenaton), circumcision, same god-names (Shaddai, Yahweh, Adhon, Allah), same language (Hebrew is based upon Egyptian). etc: etc:


It is well known to accademics that Judaism is based upon Egyptian monotheistic beliefs, even if the general public is unaware. However, the question is how long those traditions lasted - did they last into the first millennium?

My contention is that the titles of the elder Mary (who was called the Handmaiden of God and Virgin) were based upon the old Egyptian tradition of God's Wife, who was also known as the Handmaiden of God and the Virgin. Since Mary must have been God's Wife (because she had god's child), it is likely that the was following this ancient tradition.

As I say, Dan Brown could have really set the world alight if he had wanted...



Cheers
Ralph Ellis
Edfu Books





PS The Hyksos = Israelite theory initially stems from the following similarity.


THE HYKSOS PHARAOH'S EXODUS FROM EGYPT
THE ISRAELITES' EXODUS

They were known as shepherds. (Shepherd Kings)
They were known as shepherds.

A pharaoh of theirs was called Jacoba.
A leader of theirs was called Jacob.

They were involved in a war with the Theban Egyptians.
They were involved in a war with the Egyptians.

There were storms and darkness. (Tempest stele)
There were storms and darkness.

Some 500,000 were ejected from Egypt on a great exodus.
Some 500,000 were ejected from Egypt on a great exodus.

They set off from Pi-Ramesse (Avaris).
They set of from Pi-Ramesse.

They travelled to Jerusalem. (Manetho)
They travelled to Jerusalem.

They were a mighty military force.
They were a mighty military force.

They destroyed Jericho.
They destroyed Jericho.


See Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs.

I personally found this book to be quite interesting...I like it even more b/c of the controversy that it stirred up lol

Haven't read it, but watched several shows about it.

It is a fact that back in the days of Jesus, it would have been Joseph's duty to find Jesus a wife, as it was custom, and it was also fact that, until fairly recently in history, people married at far younger ages than today, so Jesus could very well have been married by 15 or 16, his teen years and 20's seem nonexistant in the bible. Another fact is that if Jesus was in fact a rabbi, as he is called in the bible, based on Jewish religious laws of his day, rabbi's had to be married, they couldn't be single and simply be allowed to get married, like today, they had to be married.

Lot's of fictional stories have been centered around very real things.

First modern judaism is a derivative of the tribes own pre monotheistic beliefs. To conclude they adopted there beliefs from those who enslaved them is really quite silly.

Also the Jesus was a rabbi there fore had to be married is in fact wrong. A formally trained rabbi recognized by the leaders had to be married yes. No evidence exists of any formal training in the traditions nor does any evidence exist he was formally recognized as a rabbi ever in his life time. His treatment at the hands of the pharasies is proof of that.