Da Vinci - Not impressed

Well, I finally caved in and read the book. I was not impressed. I read "Angels and Demons" first and thought it was better. This seems like a rehash of that book. I guess I was pretty pissed off at the way things are presented as fact. In reality, most of the statements he represents as facts are half truths, or statements taken out of context, etc... Council of Nicea - a good example. The main thrust of the council was not to dispute the divinity of Jesus, but rather the type of divinity, especially his relationship to the Father. This duplicity when calling things facts was noted previously by another (now semi-retired) blogger.

I was particularly disappointed by the part of the book where **MINOR SPOILER** they find a parchment with some writing on it, and the Harvard symbologist, who was just told how everything is centered around Leonardo da Vinci, doesn't recognize the famous mirror text which Leonardo was famous for. Instead, he thinks it is a Semitic language, perhaps Rashi script (???!) or STA''M with crowns (!#?!??!^%). You have to be kidding me. I won't even get into the description of the library computers...

Overall, I thought the book was pretty good in terms of action, but pretty weak on scholarship and fairly hyped and sensationalist. Sorry to once again be contrarian.