This post ruins the story for those who haven't read the book.
The Da Vinci code, actually, is a pretty bad novel. Not in the sense that it doesen't grab you and compels you to read the rest, it does, I read it and felt that way. More in the sense that Dan Brown is kind of an idiot. It was obvious that not all of the things were true, but I expected at least the 'fact' page to be true. It isn't. Much of the book is based on lies, which really dissapointed me and ruined the book for me after I had read it.
For example, the Priory of Sion never did exist. It was actually a frenchman in the 50s who created it and planted false evidence in the Bibliothèque nationale, a parchment claiming it had existed for hundreds of years. The man's name was Plantard, and he claimed to be himself a descendent of Jesus. He was anti-semitist, and wildly supported Hitler. Dan Brown actually used his name as one of the two families that were descendants of Jesus... So it's kind of a bad start. I don't really feel like listing all of the lies, but it's disturbing that Dan Brown would base his book on a society created by an anti-semitist. It's impossible he didn't know after the amount of research he probably did.
Sure, he has a great style, his other books are probably good (if he doesen't lie), but it's all false. I was hoping part of it would be true.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!