by Anne StClair

Created on: January 07, 2007   Last Updated: July 23, 2009

The Da Vinci Code has sparked an enormous amount of controversy since its release, and yet the novel is based on theories and ideas that preceded the novel by several decades. Dan Brown simply wove the theories that already existed into a fast-paced thriller with a cliffhanger at the end of every chapter.

Dan Brown used many sources for his novel, and his own website lists his major sources on Mary, the Grail, Opus Dei, the Knights Templar, and Leonardo da Vinci, at http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/resource s.html (click on the link under Resources for Researchers).One of his primary sources was 'Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln. One of the characters in the novel is actually called Teabing - an anagram of Baigent. This book is mentioned in the novel, as is 'The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdelene and the Holy Grail', by Margaret Starbird, so it is certain these were major sources.

'Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' was first published in 1982. My copy (pub 1987) quotes a number of reviews. Perhaps Dan Brown read one of them early on and it sparked his imagination. It reads: 'The plot has all the elements of an International thriller... incredible. (Newsweek).' This book was controversial when it was released, and became an International bestseller. There is also a sequel to this book: 'The Messianic Legacy' published in 1986, and written by the same people.

A quick glance at the chapter headings in the book 'Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' shows you where Dan Brown got much of his information, as they include chapters on the Knights Templar, the Prieure de Sion, 'Legend and the Merovingians', 'Blood Royal'. The authors put forward the hypothesis that Mary Magdelene might have been Jesus's wife, that they might have had offspring, that a person was the Grail, that the person was Mary, and that there is an hereditary bloodline descended from Jesus.

Dan Brown used many other sources in his research, including books on Leonardo da Vinci, the Knights Templar, and Opus Dei, and of course the da Vinci paintings, which anyone can see. He did his homework. But one should remember the difference between 'theory' and 'fact'. Theories cannot justifiably be criticised for not being facts. And novels cannot justifiably be criticised for using theories.A novel is fiction.

On the other hand, a fictional novel that claims a foundation in fact has an added requirement that the facts upon which the fiction is based are verifiable. Does Dan Brown's novel claim a foundation in fact? This is debatable. and the alleged facts upon which the fiction is based are not verifiable, and will, no doubt, be the subject of debate for decades to come.

Learn more about this author, Anne StClair.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.