Comments on: The Original Da Vinci Code?

By: tasneem khalil

tasneem khalil — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 09:42:54 +0000

360Â° - 19/8 2006…

…

Blogging Mr. President.

John Pilger: The real threat we face in Britain is Blair.

The truth about terrorism.

The most beautiful ugly woman.

Taj: Is nothing sacred?

Selective war photography: Worthy and unwort…

By: tasneem khalil » 360Â° - 19/8 2006

tasneem khalil » 360Â° - 19/8 2006 — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 09:42:36 +0000

[...] The original Da Vinci Code? [...]

By: SadButTrue

SadButTrue — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 21:05:34 +0000

Having read HBHG shortly after it came out, I was delighted with The Da Vinci Code. It was like someone had written a book just for me. As to the extensive footnotes and references in HBHG, I have consulted as many as I could find and found that Baigent et. al. were very scrupulous about their sources. In other words, they didn’t make this stuff up.
The powers that (shouldn’t) be are understandably a bit panicky that Da Vinci has once again drawn attention to its non-fiction predecessor. This panic has little to do with whether Mary Magdalene bore Jesus’ children, which question cannot possibly be answered through the veil of time. The true controversy hidden behind the sensationalist lineage question is quite accessible through extant documents, mostly canonical.
Quietly hidden in the book-selling flash of templars, treasures and lovers is this question, asked in an almost offhanded way in either HBHG or its sequel The Messianic Legacy (forgive my memory - it has been 20 years): Was St. Paul dutifully advancing the causes and ideas of Jesus, or was he usurping Jesus’ name and reputation to push his own agenda?
Having done considerable research on this in the late ’80s and early ’90s I rather think the latter. The picture of Jesus that emerged in that research is what has got the Christian churches in such a snit.

By: sonia

sonia — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:53:42 +0000

“The Grail legend is really part of the history of ideas and so is open to all kinds of post modern interpretation.”

Absolutely.

By: Leighton Cooke

Leighton Cooke — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:20:32 +0000

The Grail legend is really part of the history of ideas and so is open to all kinds of post modern interpretation. It seems to fill a gap in people’s spiritual needs and their desire for an alternative history. As an incurable romantic I just love all the mystery. As I’m minding the squat and very busy two of my close friends went to Ecotopia (also my radio colleagues) so I’ll be off to the bookstore for a good read. Rennes-le-ChÃ¢teau here I come at least in the mind.

By: sonia

sonia — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:40:49 +0000

Thanks FOB

Well Da Vinci Code was a fast-paced thriller - as you well know - and a piece of fiction. The Holy Grail is certainly an interesting text if you are curious about where some of the ‘facts’ in the Da Vinci Code are ’sourced’.

{ or shall we say..if one had read the HBHG, and one wanted to weave a fictional tale around it, one might have come up with something just like the Da Vinci Code..Dan Brown was one smart guy.. HGHB had all the ‘hallmarks of a thriller’ after all!Fascinating stuff -even if one doesn’t see any credibility in the HGHB speculations. And there is the section of the population who find any mention of ancient manuscripts and ’secrets’ linked into Grail Romances terribly excting..}

But of course the Holy Grail is what some people call ‘pseudo-history’ - { i love that phrase - what isn’t pseudo-history? it’s all a matter of perspective surely - some of what passes for as history is probably someone’s speculations) and the authors do make it clear that it they aren’t setting forth their hypotheses as ‘fact’ therefore do not refer to it as a work of ‘history’. Rather they were interested in certain questions which they feel are unanswered through history ( and they generally are - but that of course again depends on one’s viewpoint - some people like to think there are no loose ends..ha) and for through various lines of reasoning ( which they set out) come to certain ’shocking’ conclusions - which are of course open to debate. {and boy have they been debated!}

What’s interesting is that their research started off when one of the authors read a tantalizing book by Gerard de Sede - “L’Or de Rennes” …and got entangled with the mystery surrounding the Rennes-le-Chateau, which in itself is the subject ( and has been for a while - now of course it’s gone through the roof..) of much speculation, hoo-ha and ‘conspiracy theories’.

Umm - lots of fun if you’re into that sort of thing. Some people really resent the ‘appropriation’ of Templar history but then who hasn’t appropriated some Templar history?

By: Bengali Fob

Bengali Fob — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:11:06 +0000

I havne’t read either of those two books. Of course I’ve read Dan Brown’s. I prefered to read the illustrated versions. It was cool seeing the actual thing he was talking about while I was reading.

So, have you compared the Holy Grail book with Dan Brown’s yet? Whaddya think?

BTW, Nice blog! I love the variety you present. Keep it up!

By: sonia

sonia — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 16:11:24 +0000

Me too

By: Leighton Cooke

Leighton Cooke — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 14:47:18 +0000

This was the book that caused all the furore in the recent court case. I’ve also always been fascinated by the Templar/Cathar/Magdelene history.

By: Paranoia or Schizophrenia?

Paranoia or Schizophrenia? — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 13:23:27 +0000

Holy Blood Holy Grail: The Original Da Vinci Code?…

The Holy Blood - Holy Grail - Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln (1982)

Written as a follow up to a BBC documentary, this is the book where the authors presented an â€˜audaciousâ€™ and groundbreaking hypothesis : theories which of cours…