No, as I stated before, I honestly read it and thought it was the background for the story I was about to read. Whether it was true or not was only interesting to me as a matter of curoisity, not whether or not it was actually true because it said so. Why exactly, is it different then him having a prologue which discusses it as fact in an opening chapter without actually saying "FACT"? It's the same thing, except in one case its bold and concise.
I did a 10 minute google search and very quickly concluded that your "fairly conclusively" conclusion is inconclusive. What is clear is that there was some dude in the 50's that started a modern Priory of Sion. But I didn't find any source that says this excludes the possibility that a previous version of the Priory of Sion did not also exist. I'd be interested. Do you have any sources that isn't 10 gillion pages long? Something that quickly summarizes it. Also, I'd like a source that doesn't have a religious agenda.
This is pretty historical, and has pretty conclusive info, IMO about the scammers that made it up. http://priory-of-sion.com/ also the wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_Zion
Yea, I saw those but they were too long. That crap is as long as the book itself...and not nearly as interesting. My understanding is they found a document titled "dossiers secretes" in a national library. I can't seem to find anything that conclusively discredits the origin of this document. I see opinion and conjecture about the origins but nothing conclusive. Can you point me to anything?
If "they" found them in the BN, it was because "they" put them there!: Here they are, btw http://priory-of-sion.tripod.com/psp/pdd/posf.jpg Kind of an incriminating doc for a "secret society", lol
If I decided to purchase this book and went down to my local bookstore would I find “The Da Vinci Code” in the fiction or non-fiction section?
You know what, that is a good point. Why would a secret society document itself? Especially 1000 years ago when folks were writing everything down like we do now. so fundamentally, its counter intuitive. Okay, Da Vinci Code is crap. Its still a good story. And it is still an interesting note about our current times for how much attention the subject seems to be grabbing. Not sure what it means but it sure struck a cord.
Da Vinci Code is in fiction. However, this book was actually based on two other books that might be listed as non-fiction. I don't beleive it is presented in a story format.
2000 years later, Jesus still sells! he still is the subject of movies...finds renderings of him on the covers of magazines...elicits a response.
I thought he was quite good in Bad Lieutenant. Subtle... Good screen presence... Went toe to toe with Keitel really.
his cameo in Prince of Tides was breathtaking. but it was his little known role as the guy in the chewbacca outfit that i feel he should be most acclaimed for.
