One Biblical Scholar Responds
David Landry
University of St. Thomas
|
|
What's Wrong with The Da Vinci Code? One Biblical Scholar Responds
David Landry |
The novel The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown has caused a sensation, not only (or even primarily) because of its literary merit (which is dubious) or its plotting (which is compelling), but mostly because of its claims to accurately represent history with respect to the origins of Christianity, the marriage of Jesus Christ to Mary Magdalene, the more authentic character of various non-canonical gospels, the true nature of the Holy Grail, the symbolic meaning of the art works of Leonardo Da Vinci, and more. The front matter of the book contains the author’s guarantee that the historical documents and organizations mentioned in the book all exist. The characters in the novel who are the source of the historical claims are all depicted as reliable experts. One is a Harvard professor, another is an expert in religious history from Oxford. Each character is shown to lend credibility to his historical claims with quotations from ancient texts, references to (real) concurring scholarly works, and testimony to the popularity of the views expressed among other experts. Brown’s website furthers the claims to historical accuracy: “The secret described in the novel has been chronicled for centuries, so there are thousands of sources to draw from. In addition, I was surprised how eager historians were to share their expertise with me. One academic told me her enthusiasm for The Da Vinci Code was based in part on her hope that ‘this ancient mystery would be unveiled to a wider audience.’” The site also features blurbs such as this: "His research is impeccable." As a consequence, many people who have read the novel believe that every “historical” statement in it is true. The novel presents its claims as if they are historical facts. However, there is actually a strong blend of fact and fiction in the novel's "historical" elements. Some of Brown's claims (even the surprising ones) are solid and well-supported; others are weak and highly speculative; still others are demonstrably false.
In this site I propose to examine the claims Brown makes with respect to the Bible and early Christianity, since these are my areas of expertise. I will leave it to others to analyze Brown's claims with respect to Leonardo Da Vinci, the Priory of Sion, Opus Dei, and other "historical" elements in the novel. I have classified the claims I will examine into five categories: half-truths and misleading statements, wild exaggerations, quibbles, wholly unsubstantiated claims, and outright falsehoods. For each example I include a quotation from Brown's novel with the disputed claim highlighted, and then I explain what is historically objectionable in Brown's writing.
Half-truths and Misleading Statements
What's Right with The Da Vinci Code?
Text of an address given by me at Hamline University, October 27, 2006