| |
|
redtara: are you thinking of Holy Blood, Holy Grail by Baigent, Lincoln and Lee? Amazon says this: quote:Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln, and Richard Leigh, authors of The Messianic Legacy, spent over 10 years on their own kind of quest for the Holy Grail, into the secretive history of early France. What they found, researched with the tenacity and attention to detail that befits any great quest, is a tangled and intricate story of politics and faith that reads like a mystery novel. It is the story of the Knights Templar, and a behind-the-scenes society called the Prieure de Sion, and its involvement in reinstating descendants of the Merovingian bloodline into political power. Why? The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail assert that their explorations into early history ultimately reveal that Jesus may not have died on the cross, but lived to marry and father children whose bloodline continues today. The authors' point here is not to compromise or to demean Jesus, but to offer another, more complete perspective of Jesus as God's incarnation in man. The power of this secret, which has been carefully guarded for hundreds of years, has sparked much controversy. For all the sensationalism and hoopla surrounding Holy Blood, Holy Grail and the alternate history that it outlines, the authors are careful to keep their perspective and sense of skepticism alive in its pages, explaining carefully and clearly how they came to draw such combustible conclusions.
about it. Disinfo have a page about it here. From the bumph I'm reading, I can't see the church bank (Opus Dei, too?) connections, but I'm sure they're there. Certainly, I think this was the basis for the Grail story in Preacher - and it's got that much "truth-is-weirder-than-fiction" value that you could add almost anything to it and still have it sound credible... If this is the book you're talking about, it's relatively cheap (it's also been revised a couple of times) and is pretty plentiful, second-hand. I've never read it, though...
Another question: is Eco a shithouse theoretician? A friend of mine said his theoretical writing isn't that rigorous ("pile of shite" being more or less the term used) or as intelligent as his fiction. Comments? I'm not that well-versed in his theory, so I don't know - but would like to. |
|
|
the other day [the horror...] and it really reminded me at the beginning of a good essay by Eco about archaeologists rediscovering the 20th C. in the future, and trying to make sense of it. Needless to say, they get it all wrong...)