Scan barcode
zeydejd's review against another edition
2.0
It took me almost a year to finish this book, and for good reason. It's dense material, especially for someone (like myself) who doesn't have any background in Christianity, biblical history, etc. It was easy to get sucked into some parts and lose track of others. The overall hypothesis they propose - Jesus was, in fact, married (to none other than the Magdalene) and had a child/bloodline - is not outlandish and the text makes good points as to why and how this is possible and why the Church would want to keep such a revelation hidden, especially given political context.
Many of the other links the book tries to make are very circumstantial, and the authors admit this readily themselves! They are the first ones to make note of the fact that some of the "proof" they are offering up is not actually proof at all, or that everything they are noting is, in fact, a theory and nothing else. It's a good way to cover your bases, but it's tiresome to read a few hundred pages of "maybes."
I didn't regret reading it, but wouldn't necessarily recommend it to others unless they already had a pretty strong background in the aforementioned subjects. Trying to read it without that is like trying to read medicinal research while simultaneously trying to understand basic scientific concepts.
Many of the other links the book tries to make are very circumstantial, and the authors admit this readily themselves! They are the first ones to make note of the fact that some of the "proof" they are offering up is not actually proof at all, or that everything they are noting is, in fact, a theory and nothing else. It's a good way to cover your bases, but it's tiresome to read a few hundred pages of "maybes."
I didn't regret reading it, but wouldn't necessarily recommend it to others unless they already had a pretty strong background in the aforementioned subjects. Trying to read it without that is like trying to read medicinal research while simultaneously trying to understand basic scientific concepts.
nerdy_scholar's review against another edition
4.0
Having read this book as fiction, I enjoyed it a lot, though it was fragmentary in plot now and then. Alas, read as a work of history, this book is a great hoax! Knowing the popularity of Jesus at his own time, his marriage couldn't be that easily forgotten. If a dynasty of his lineage existed at any time, they would have spreaded the word of their sacred lineage and people would have revolted against any attempt at dethroning them. Today, no one would even think of reviving the divine right of kings in Europe or the world, after the advent of the enlightenment and its revolutionary concepts. Thus, every argument in the book is logically refuted.
bookelf's review against another edition
4.0
Made me add tons of books to my ''to-read'' list therefor the high stars.
patrickkanouse's review against another edition
1.0
A great read...but ultimately built on a hoax and that is why the one star.
uncle_remus's review against another edition
3.0
"Conspiratorially satisfying" says one reviewer. I have to agree.
I read this after reading The Da Vinci Code. That being said, many reviewers compare these two books, as-if both were non-fiction books, and blast Dan Brown. If that's your take, you got it wrong. Dan Brown's book is a work of fiction. He freely acknowledges it. He only claims that the art work and architecture are accurate. The rest is just a story, a conspiratory story, a hidden history, and a fast-paced mystery, where only parts are true. I don't think Dan Brown is confused; I think you are.
That being said, is this a case of a midget on a giant's shoulders, or a giant on a midget's shoulders? I think the latter.
As so many have pointed out, this book is presented as legitimate research (not sure you'd call it "scientific" research), but it is being passed off as legitimate. And, there is oodles of research. At times, it is confusing, or mind-numbingly boring. It really does bog down in the middle. A lot of time is spent building up a ground work. But, then there is a lot, and I mean a LOT, of speculation, and castles built in the air. It certainly is thought-provoking and fun. But make no mistake, it is speculation.
From a rating standpoint, it loses a star for the presentation. Lots of duplication of ideas, and not well-organized (maybe it should lose two for this?). It loses yet another star because this passes itself off as legitimate research, and fails the necessary logical connections. But, it is all jolly good fun, if you are not a true-blue blood believer and gasping at the (ahem) heresy.
Did Jesus have a wife? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't.
Did Jesus have kids? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't.
Did Jesus ever laugh? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't. WAIT! WHAT? Jesus never laughed. Never in his lifetime. Not as a kid? See, the bible doesn't record everything he did. Did he ever defecate? Not in the bible, so therefore it never happened. That's the problem with the literal interpretation. The rest is speculation. Therefore, it really IS possible. But that's not to say it is definitive. (And, THAT is why you cannot compare this book to Dan Brown's...one knows it is fiction, the other thinks it is not).
One problem I do have is with SANGREAL. Is it split SAN GREAL or SANG REAL? And this is so monumental, it is the crux of the book, as it is the penultimate; the title of the book. Ponder this. That's like saying someone finding a book a 1000 years from now and seeing the word "THERAPIST", and then a pseudo-scientist arguing that the word should be split "THE RAPIST," and then writing a 500 page book on those implications.
Just saying...
I read this after reading The Da Vinci Code. That being said, many reviewers compare these two books, as-if both were non-fiction books, and blast Dan Brown. If that's your take, you got it wrong. Dan Brown's book is a work of fiction. He freely acknowledges it. He only claims that the art work and architecture are accurate. The rest is just a story, a conspiratory story, a hidden history, and a fast-paced mystery, where only parts are true. I don't think Dan Brown is confused; I think you are.
That being said, is this a case of a midget on a giant's shoulders, or a giant on a midget's shoulders? I think the latter.
As so many have pointed out, this book is presented as legitimate research (not sure you'd call it "scientific" research), but it is being passed off as legitimate. And, there is oodles of research. At times, it is confusing, or mind-numbingly boring. It really does bog down in the middle. A lot of time is spent building up a ground work. But, then there is a lot, and I mean a LOT, of speculation, and castles built in the air. It certainly is thought-provoking and fun. But make no mistake, it is speculation.
From a rating standpoint, it loses a star for the presentation. Lots of duplication of ideas, and not well-organized (maybe it should lose two for this?). It loses yet another star because this passes itself off as legitimate research, and fails the necessary logical connections. But, it is all jolly good fun, if you are not a true-blue blood believer and gasping at the (ahem) heresy.
Did Jesus have a wife? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't.
Did Jesus have kids? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't.
Did Jesus ever laugh? The bible doesn't say he did. But it also doesn't say he didn't. WAIT! WHAT? Jesus never laughed. Never in his lifetime. Not as a kid? See, the bible doesn't record everything he did. Did he ever defecate? Not in the bible, so therefore it never happened. That's the problem with the literal interpretation. The rest is speculation. Therefore, it really IS possible. But that's not to say it is definitive. (And, THAT is why you cannot compare this book to Dan Brown's...one knows it is fiction, the other thinks it is not).
One problem I do have is with SANGREAL. Is it split SAN GREAL or SANG REAL? And this is so monumental, it is the crux of the book, as it is the penultimate; the title of the book. Ponder this. That's like saying someone finding a book a 1000 years from now and seeing the word "THERAPIST", and then a pseudo-scientist arguing that the word should be split "THE RAPIST," and then writing a 500 page book on those implications.
Just saying...
bookaneer's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting pseudohistory. Better this one than that movie.
stuedb's review against another edition
4.0
Mind blowing! Amazing research into the Holy Grail and Christendom. Well worth a read.
deborama's review against another edition
2.0
I registered a book at BookCrossing.com!
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/11776768
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/11776768
ph230's review against another edition
3.0
I've studied history, I did not enjoy Dan Brow's books (any of them, I'd read of them), but I enjoyed the reading of this one, although it's quite redundant.
Too bad the ground for their researches is a fake.
Anyway, it is worth to read.
Too bad the ground for their researches is a fake.
Anyway, it is worth to read.
prosewhore's review against another edition
3.0
I've been meaning to buy this one for AGES only to realise I had it in French in my library (goes to say I have way too many books but that's a topic for another day)!
It's no secret that I'm a conspiracy theory fanatic, I have to hold myself back from spending all my days in a basement reading pages upon pages on the supposed illuminati secrets. It's not that I necessarily believe in it all I just find the idea of those secret societies ruling the world very interesting.
I found Holy Blood, Holy Grail pretty riveting, despite a few chapters on genealogy that could have used some serious editing. I'm not really convinced about the priory of sion holding the secrets to Jesus' bloodline, some of the theories of relations between people are honestly so far fetched, however in between all this are some really interesting historical facts about the south of France (in which I happen to live hehe), the cathars, the templars etc.. If anything, this book made me want to research more about the history of my country, which in my opinion is always a good thing. As to Jesus, I'm not catholic but I wouldn't see an issue with his image being more human than godly and I would adore to know which documents now accepted as part of the bible have been changed, cut and why by the decision makers back in the day. I wouldn't be surprised or shocked if he had had a wife, or children, now the resurection is a whole other topic but to be fair, my knowledge about the bible and christianity stay very limited so I wouldn't say whether I think their theories could prove to be true or not, I have no idea..
As to know if " Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is a good book, it's entertaining yes, but a decent history book would certainly be a more valuable read. And I'm definitely turning to that soon, I very much want to know more about the history of catholicism, if anyone has recommendations, I'll take them gladly !
It's no secret that I'm a conspiracy theory fanatic, I have to hold myself back from spending all my days in a basement reading pages upon pages on the supposed illuminati secrets. It's not that I necessarily believe in it all I just find the idea of those secret societies ruling the world very interesting.
I found Holy Blood, Holy Grail pretty riveting, despite a few chapters on genealogy that could have used some serious editing. I'm not really convinced about the priory of sion holding the secrets to Jesus' bloodline, some of the theories of relations between people are honestly so far fetched, however in between all this are some really interesting historical facts about the south of France (in which I happen to live hehe), the cathars, the templars etc.. If anything, this book made me want to research more about the history of my country, which in my opinion is always a good thing. As to Jesus, I'm not catholic but I wouldn't see an issue with his image being more human than godly and I would adore to know which documents now accepted as part of the bible have been changed, cut and why by the decision makers back in the day. I wouldn't be surprised or shocked if he had had a wife, or children, now the resurection is a whole other topic but to be fair, my knowledge about the bible and christianity stay very limited so I wouldn't say whether I think their theories could prove to be true or not, I have no idea..
As to know if " Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is a good book, it's entertaining yes, but a decent history book would certainly be a more valuable read. And I'm definitely turning to that soon, I very much want to know more about the history of catholicism, if anyone has recommendations, I'll take them gladly !