Holy Blood, Holy Grail

The mystery examined in this book first came to public attention roughly a century ago, when an obscure French priest named Berenger Sauniere assumed his post in the village of Rennes-le-Chateau in Southern France. The priest uncovered some ancient, mysterious documents in an abandoned church near his village. Intrigued, he took them to the local bishop, who then instructed Sauniere to head to Paris and consult some "experts" there. When the priest returned to Rennes-le-Chateau, things were definitely different. He suddenly had at his disposal millions of francs, leading to several extensive and bizarre building projects in the area. When the Catholic authorities questioned his expenditures, Sauniere brazenly defied the inquiries. Surprisingly, the Church did nothing to the man even though he was a lowly priest. Moreover, he often received visits from Parisian bigwigs, people a man in Sauniere's position couldn't possibly know. When the priest died his secret apparently died with him. Or did it? Not according to the authors of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail." Taking the Sauniere mystery as a starting point, the book proposes a shocking theory about the very origins of Christianity and nearly every secret society during the last 1000 years.

By looking at such diverse historical events as the Albigensian heresy, the Crusades, Freemasonry, and Christ's crucifixion, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" posits that Berenger Sauniere discovered documents referring to a mysterious secret society called the Priory of Zion, an organization composed of elites in European society who believe that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene, fathered children, and probably didn't die on the cross. Instead, they believe Jesus went into hiding while his family sailed for Gaul. Ultimately, Jesus' offspring married into the local population, thereby helping to form the Merovingian dynasty. Although these monarchs ultimately lost power, the bloodline of Jesus survived into succeeding generations. One descendant of the Messiah was Godfroi de Bouillon, the crusader who captured Jerusalem from the Saracens during the First Crusade. The Knights Templar, that band of knights dedicated to fighting for Christ, was in actuality a branch of the previously mentioned Priory of Zion. When the Europeans lost Jerusalem to the Saracens, the two organizations split and the Templars went to their doom. European history, according to "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," has since been a titanic struggle for power between the Catholic Church and the Priory of Zion. The documents discovered by Sauniere, along with additional information unearthed by the authors in France's National Library, have shown that men such as Leonardo Da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Nicholas Flamel, and Jean Cocteau have served as Grand Masters of the Priory of Zion. Amazing, isn't it? Imagine what would happen if incontrovertible evidence emerged proving a descendant of Jesus walked the earth today.

This summary is the tip of the iceberg. There are so many things explored in this book that it is impossible to summarize them all. Most people would have a serious problem with the findings of "Holy Blood," and for the most part, they would be right. The authors often make extraordinary leaps from one piece of evidence to another. For example, the book claims that "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," the notorious anti-Semitic tract which influenced National Socialism, was originally a document concerning the truth about the Merovingian bloodlines. I don't buy this argument in the least, but that doesn't mean I reject this book completely. I thought the commentary on the Gospels was, with a few exceptions, well done, liberally employing creative reasoning and an intelligent eye for detail. Does that mean I buy the authors' arguments? I will when the Priory of Zion steps forward with proof.

Predictably, the arrival of "Holy Blood" on bookshelves in the early 1980s provoked a storm of controversy. The Church excoriated the authors for the views expressed in the book, as did history scholars and theologians. Of course, the Priory of Zion remained silent throughout the whole ordeal, neither proving nor denying the claims made in the book. As I read the "Holy Blood," I kept wondering whatever became of this ultra secret organization. Are they still around waiting for the perfect time to present to the world the descendent of Christ? Or are they sitting around a table somewhere in France, playing bridge and drinking coffee while they laugh over this book? Five stars for the entertainment factor alone, but much less if taken on a purely factual level.


Christianity Exposed   September 24, 2003
J. GENIO (Earth)
455 out of 605 found this review helpful

This book may not be suitable for die-hard Christians who are afraid to question their own religious beliefs. Before I begin, let me state that the authors do not want to destroy Christianity. Instead, this is an historic look at Christ, Christianity, and the Knights Templar. Therefore, for those of us who wish to venture into historical speculation about the divinity of Christ and the reason why the Pope and the King of France eventually crusaded against the Knights Templar, then this is the book for you.

Basically, this book discusses how the Knights Templar may have discovered "a truth" about historic Jesus. The authors give splendid examples from the scriptures, other writings, and works of art to support their fundamental theory -- Jesus Christ survived the crucification and established a royal bloodline. In essence, this is the Holy Grail; the royal bloodline started by Christ.

If you enjoyed the Da Vinci Code, then you will like this book as well. The themes are quite similar. For those a bit more adventurous in their search for revelations about Christianity, I suggest reading works by Umberto Eco.

By the time you complete reading these books, you may get a different opinion on the origins of Christianity, the Knights Templar, and the Free Masons.


History or Speculation? You Decide   November 3, 2003
175 out of 274 found this review helpful

Before the reader jumps to the conclusion that this book presents historical fact, a few words from one of the three authors' "Introduction to the Paperback Version," might be instructive.

"And so, our approach [in writing the book] was dictated by our material: by a need to synthesize and a need to confront and accommodate historical `anomalies' habitually ignored by conventional scholars. It was therefore not surprising that conventional scholars questioned our approach. But it was also significant, and not just coincidental, that the most sympathetic responses to our book seemed to come from literary figures-from important novelists like Anthony Burgess, Anthony Powell, and Peter Vansittart. For, unlike the professional historian, the novelist is accustomed to an approach such as ours. He is accustomed to synthesizing diverse material, to making connections more elusive than those explicitly preserved in documents. He recognizes that truth may not be confined only to recorded facts but often lies in more intangible domains-in cultural achievements, in myths, legends, and traditions; in the psychic life of both individuals and entire peoples. For the novelist, knowledge is not subdivided into rigid compartments, and there are no taboos, no 'disreputable' subjects. History is not for him something frozen, something petrified into periods, each of which can be isolated and subjected to a controlled laboratory experiment. On the contrary, it is for him a fluid organic and dynamic process wherein psychology, sociology, politics, art, and tradition are interwoven in a single seamless fabric. It was with this vision akin to that of the novelist that we created our book."

An example of the means by which this "seamless fabric" is created is the author's justification for discounting the likelihood of the key events in Jesus Christ's life earlier in this introductory text. He writes, "It is quite simply more likely that a man would have married, fathered children, and attempted to gain a throne than that he would have been born of a virgin, walked on water, and risen from the dead."

Uneducated readers should beware (for presumably, educated readers will immediately recognize the "evidence" presented in this book as academically suspect). The supporting evidence for the "seamless fabric" presented in this book should be treated as, at best, speculative until further investigation of credible sources confirms it.


An illusion based on nonsense   April 6, 2004
Karl (England, Great Britain)
123 out of 295 found this review helpful

The simple truth about this book is that it is utterly lacking in genuine scholarship. It is, in fact, pure speculation based on nothing resembling valid evidence.

The purpose of the book seems to be that the "Holy Blood" - the bloodline of the descendents of Jesus Christ - began with the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene - the "Holy Grail" - at Cana, and the subsequent birth of their child.

Quite obviously, then, the whole book depends on the production of some kind of proof that Jesus and Mary were indeed the bridegroom and bride at the marriage at Cana where Jesus is said to have turned water into high quality wine.
Without the marriage and the child nothing else in the book amounts to the proverbial "hill of beans".

So, does the book make a good case for this central claim?

No.
In fact all it offers is page after page of "if" this, "if" that and "if" the other. And that isn't the worst of it. A little careful reading shows that the authors aren't even sure what the marriage at Cana was about. So, at one point they write:

"From the account in the Fourth Gospel, the wedding at Cana would seem to be a modest local ceremony - a typical village wedding..." (page 348).

Got that? The marriage at Cana was "modest", "local", a "village wedding".
Okay, let's move forward just 16 (sixteen) pages and see what the book says about that same event:

"And the wedding at Cana would seem to bear further witness to Jesus's status and social position.
"This wedding does not appear to have been a modest, humble festival conducted by the 'common people.' On the contrary it bears all the marks of an extravagant aristocratic union, a 'high society' affair attended by at least several hundred guests...
"All things considered, the wedding at Cana would seem to have been a sumptuous ceremony of the gentry or aristocracy." (page 364)

Well, I'm not sure how anyone can come to two such diametrically opposed descriptions of a single event and claim that they are indeed both describing the SAME event.
How does a "modest local ceremony - a typical village wedding" manage to also be "an extravagant aristocratic union", "a sumptuous ceremony of the gentry or aristocracy" and "a 'high society' affair attended by at least several hundred guests"?

What is patently obvious is that in a rational world these two accounts definitely DO NOT describe the same event.
And if the book can contradict itself in such an extreme fashion over something as simple as a wedding feast, what possible faith can one have in anything else it says?

The book is indeed about an illusion, it is most definitely based on nonsense, and it certainly looks as though it assumes that its readers will register off the scale for gullibility.

An insulting and unsavoury book of no discernible merit whatsoever - not even as trash fiction.


Gripping Story, Flawed Research   February 21, 2000
Doulos (USA)
91 out of 134 found this review helpful

Summary: Baigent completed an interesting review of Europe's Royal Bloodlines (Merovingian). His writing style makes the subject come to life and appear to be accurate. However, his ultimate hypothesis rests on very weak and inaccurate biblical quotes demonstrating a cursory research and knowledge of the bible. This issue renders his final hypothesis highly doubtful and his base genealogical research of the Merovingian bloodlines fully under question.

Recommendation: I would recommend Baigent's book as interesting and thought provoking reading, while encouraging self-research and skepticism by the reader. While I found Baigent's book useful in understanding what family the anti-Christ derives from (that is, the lineage of the serpent/dragon that dwells in the "sea"), the average person can be deceived into believing biased suppositions and allegations lacking appropriate research. Overall, it seems as if Baigent is a dupe who has been supported to spout whatever stories the Merovingians need to support their own questionable objectives.

Review: Although, highly offensive to Christians, the book can be relevant to biblically knowledgeable people IF his genealogical research of the royal families from 400 BC forward is accurate. The bizarre myth of the origination of the Merovingians (a pregnant woman being re-impregnated by a serpent/dragon while swimming in the ocean) can be re-interpreted from the bible and its symbolism found in the books of Genesis (Gen 3 - the Serpent) and Revelation (Rev 12 - the dragon). This is the myth that the Merovingian Dynasty relies on in order to re-acquire the throne of Europe leads Christian's to interpret the Merovingians to be the ancestors of the still prophetic world leader (commonly known as the anti-Christ). Further, Baigent touts that this royal family heir should be able to solve the religious problems and bring together the Jews, Christians, Moslems - another Christian prophesy specifically regarding the anti-Christ.

Examples of Feeble Research:

1 Re-interpretation of Catholic Church History

Baigent seems to enjoy re-interpreting the Catholic Church's actions into supporting the tenants of the Merovingian Blood line. But, offers no proof. Numerous times Baigent notes that the Catholic Church "backs" down when "presented" with the Prior de Sion "secret information. However, Baigent never confirms the information presented to the Church, and never provides supporting material to explain the Church's actions and decisions. His only explanation is theory based on conjecture based on assumption based on supposition. The Catholic Church may have many reasons to (correctly, or incorrectly) to make a decision on. The least of the factors affecting the Church's decisions would be information that is not demonstrable, not confirmable, with no sound basis to support a change in Church Doctrine and specifically supports the Church's own prophesies of the Anti-Christ.

This feeble research weakens "Baigent's" base genealogical research. NOTE: This review is not to be interpreted as a defense of the Catholic Church - it stands in its own beliefs, blessings, blood and sins. Nor, is this review a blind defense to Christianity - it is based on valid study of the bible and its text that is verifiable to all readers.

2 Two Genealogies of Christ

Baigent accounts for the differences between the 2 genealogies in Matthew and Luke as demonstrating "mistakes" in the bible. However, the issue is readily understandable: Matthew and Luke present Christ's genealogy for different purposes, and from different perspectives.

Matthew communicates the gospel from viewpoint of Jew - Christ is presented as the Lion of Tribe of Judah. For this, Matthew starts Christ's lineage with Abraham progressing through David and Solomon, then progressing through Christ's legal father, Joseph, and finishing by presenting Christ as the Messiah - the Lion of the tribe of Judah.

Luke's genealogy is specifically a very different genealogy, but it states it is of Jesus the "supposed" son of Joseph which is the son of Heli.... and on. This is not a "begotten" genealogy (bloodline), but a Mother's genealogy that is represented in accordance with the Jewish custom - Hebrews did not permit the name of a woman to enter the genealogical tables, but inserted the husband as the son of him who was in reality the father-in-law. That is, Heli is Joseph's Father-in-law. This is consistent with Old Testament lineages of David the show Boaz as David's ancestor, but does not mention Rahab, who is also significant and mentioned in other passages.

Luke was a physician and was preoccupied with presenting Christ as the Son of Man - in his humanity. He showed that Christ was God incarnate. Borne of a Virgin into humanity. Luke starts Christ's genealogy from 1st man - Adam - to King David. However, Luke goes through David directly to David's son Nathan - Solomon's brother. His genealogy is then traced through to Heli, Mary's Father. This demonstrates the actual Blood line of Christ.

Second, these genealogies are very significant in that they comply with every requirement of prophecy and law in the Hebrew scriptures. Including in Genesis 3, where the Messiah had to be born of the Virgin. Second, Jeremiah 22 states that God placed a blood curse on the lineage of David from King Jeconiah forward - that is no one of Jeconiah's descendants shall sit on the throne of David. Joseph was of this bloodline and lineage and therefore disqualified from sitting on the throne of David.

Luke's lineage of Mary (Luke 3) goes through David and not through Solomon, but through Nathan, a branch that avoids the Jeconiah blood curse (Jeremiah 22) "None of His seed will prosper". Thus, Mary, who is the blood "Virgin" parent of Jesus was not cursed and therefore the proper blood forebear of the Christ, while Joseph was the legal heir to the throne, but, not the blood heir of the Messiah.

This issue is in stark contrast to the Merovingian bloodline which requires Joseph's and Christ's bloodline to support its dynastic ruse. The Merovingian genealogy goes through the bloodline of Joseph and therefore is accursed by God (Jeremiah 22) and will specifically never sit upon David's throne.

(Other Genealogical Notes for the Curious) John unabashedly focuses on Christ as the Son of God - Deity - and includes things in his gospel that are quite different than the other gospels. John's gospel demonstrates the genealogy of the pre-existent one who was before all else. He created everything and everything was created by him. Christ pre-existed all of creation. John uses the term "fulfilled" 38 times to focuses on who he was as prophesied in the old testament. Baigent fully misses this genealogy and its full significance of demonstrating Christ as God.

Mark presents Christ as the Suffering Servant who came to earth to serve mankind. Mark does not give Christ's genealogy because no one cares about the bloodline of a servant. Mark continually demonstrates Christ's works, or services to his people - those with faith.

The four gospels are very consistent in how they show Christ and his genealogy as the Messiah in accordance with the Hebrew scriptures: Matthew, the Legal Heir to the Throne of David; Luke the lineage of a man from the first man, Adam; John the lineage of God, who came down as the Messiah; and Mark which shows Christ as the suffering servant, and as such a servant, does not have a lineage.