The Da Vinci Code (Robert Langdon, #2)

ISBN: 076792603X
ISBN 13: 9780767926034
By: Dan Brown

Check Price Now


Adult Adventure Favorites Historical Fiction Mystery Mystery Thriller Novels Series Suspense Thriller

About this book

While in Paris on business, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon receives an urgent late-night phone call: the elderly curator of the Louvre has been murdered inside the museum. Near the body, police have found a baffling cipher. While working to solve the enigmatic riddle, Langdon is stunned to discover it leads to a trail of clues hidden in the works of Da Vinci -- clues visible for all to see -- yet ingeniously disguised by the painter.Langdon joins forces with a gifted French cryptologist, Sophie Neveu, and learns the late curator was involved in the Priory of Sion -- an actual secret society whose members included Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Da Vinci, among others. In a breathless race through Paris, London, and beyond, Langdon and Neveu match wits with a faceless power broker who seems to anticipate their every move. Unless Langdon and Neveu can decipher the labyrinthine puzzle in time, the Priory's ancient secret -- and an explosive historical truth -- will be lost forever.The Da Vinci Code heralds the arrival of a new breed of lightening-paced, intelligent thriller…utterly unpredictable right up to its stunning conclusion.

Reader's Thoughts


A thriller devoid of pacing or exciting language. A mystery devoid of clues, foreshadowing, or facts. A tell-all of half-truths based upon a forged document written by a schizophrenic conman. A character-driven modern novel devoid of character. The second draft of Angels and Demons. Page-turning action thanks to the literary equivalent of pulling out at the moment of orgasm. A spiritual awakening built on new-age conspiracy theory. This book is many things, and none of them good, new, or interesting. However, it is an excellent litmus test for idealistic delusion.Upon the first reading, I must admit I found it a bit interesting, but then I turned the final page, and there was no bibliography. No explanation of how the author became familiar with all the concepts he claimed to 'faithfully portray'. He wrote this book and pretended it was a history book, and then refused to support it in any way. And any history you can't check up on is a bad one. He's no better than James Frey. In fact, he may be worse, since I know people who base their religious beliefs on this book, whereas Frey's only crime was wishing he was Scarface. And really, what macho thirtysomething male doesn't?Brown had good reasons for hiding his sources: they were forged by con-man Pierre Plantard and snuck into the Bibliotheque National in Paris back in the seventies. And it's not like Plantard got away with it, either--the whole 'Priory of Sion' thing was debunked thirty years before this book was even written.The artistic 'iconography' that figures heavily into the mystery is also completely made-up, and was declared ludicrous by an art history professor of my acquaintance. There are a lot of well-known symbols and allusions in classic art, but none of them resemble Brown's claims. The whole hinge on which the plot turns--the notion that an inverted triangle is automatically symbolic of women--makes about as much sense as declaring that the use of the swastika by 3rd century, BC Buddhists was proof that they were fascists.The rest of Brown's book is filled with the sort of cliched religious conspiracies you get from your first year as a theology student. Not only that, but these conspiracies were already explored by better writers in 'Foucault's Pendulum' and the 'Illuminatus! Trilogy'.Well, I've already done more legitimate historical research on this review than Brown did in his whole book, so I guess I'll call it a day.


I accidentally deleted this from my books. So that sucks. I don't remember when I read it anymore. It was horrible.EDIT:...But not quite as horrible as the idiotic discussion which this review spawned. I hate this book. That is my opinion. Many people share that opinion. I do not claim to be capable of writing a better book (although I suspect I already have written better pieces of literature, for some school assignment or something). You can like this book if you want. But if you do, please do not embarrass yourself by stating such a thing publicly. Especially on this review's comments. Because I'm deleting them all.PSThe whole "if you can't do better, you have no right to criticize" thing is not a valid argument. So please stop making it. Please.


I was genuinely confused by the stupidity of the DaVinci code. The two protagonists were touted as supergeniuses, yet kept making the most amazing dumbfuck moves. Sometimes this could be written off as making the book accessible to its intended public (e.g., to insure that his readers understand the concept of a keystone, Brown has one of his supergenius characters exclaim, "but wait, vaulted ceilings don't *have* keys!" as an intro to a suitable-for-third-graders explanation). Other times, it was just ridiculous and disorienting. I spent significant mental energy trying to rationalize why the supergenius characters were stealing an armored van from the swiss bank and driving it straight to their hideout when *obviously* any such van would be fitted with a tracking device and thus was a dangerous thing to leave parked right outside your "safehouse". In fact, I had half convinced myself that there must be some supersecret reason that I just didn't know about as to why the swiss bank wouldn't want its vans to be traceable (the system could be hacked into, necessitates getting too many outside parties involved, etc). But then it turned out that I had been right all along - the van *was* being tracked. The Supergeniuses just hadn't considered that possibility. Duh.Not every book has to be brilliant. Sometimes a nice, fun, escapist mystery novel really hits the spot. But dude, this kind of inconsistency and bad writing (and bad imagination!) just cannot be tolerated. As a reasonably smart person, I was offended at the limitations Dan Brown seems to have projected onto human intelligence - both with respect to his characters and his audience.

AJ Griffin

First of all, let's try to rid our mind of all the hype and hoopla surrounding the whole thing. Let's pretend the whole thing is just some spiral bound notebook that you found on the train and read because you were lonely.Ok, having accomplished that, let's dole out some compliments. Good plot, Danny boy! You managed to write an interesting crime/mystery/whatever thing WHILE managing to blaspheme one of the most worshiped dudes of all time. That takes some creativity, and some balls. Kudos. If i might suggest something, though- and I realize this is hurtful, but take it like a man big guy- you probably could have done the literary world a favor by giving this wonderful little story to, er, a writer. I mean, it's nice to be able to read the whole thing in one afternoon without even having to get up for a piss, but I couldn't help but feel like I was reading the newspaper the whole time. And that's a big part of a book's validity- the whole "quality of writing" thing. Anyway, you kind of got fucked over with the whole international attention thing- now all the 'cool' people in the world will diss on your book because it's way overblown, and the only people who still embrace will be those poor little simpletons who don't know the difference between hip and square. Looks like it's a life in the lower-middle class for you, Mr. Brown.But hey- enjoy that swimming pool filled with gold doubloons.


I've finally started reading that ever so controversial best-seller by Dan Brown. Actually, not reading it, listening to it while driving around Lansing, MI. This book seems to have changed the minds of many Catholics (my grandfather included) and Protestants alike. Granted, there have long been rumors of secret societies and organizations within the Roman Catholic Church, and historical cover-ups are rampant throughout civilization. HOWEVER,The book is crap. It's not at all well written. Brown seems to feel that in order to impress the mystery of the supposed Holy Grail conspiracy upon his readers, he must be repetitive and condescending. It almost seems that the whole purpose of the book is to tell the world how much Brown knows about obscure art history and symbology, and that he is willing to explain it to the teeming masses of uniformed Christendom. His constant use of cliff-hanger chapter endings (almost every chapter) makes the novel read like it was originally intended as a serial publication. Much of Brown's story hinges upon the loss of the Sacred Feminine, and yet his main female character (a cryptologist for the French police) is constantly having to be led clue by clue to obvious conclusions by her quicker, more worldly, male counterparts.I might have put some stock into Brown's "history," he writes with conviction, if not much style. I may even have looked into some of his sources on my own. Today, though, Brown completely lost any stock I would have put into his actual knowledge. He referred, multiple times, to Jesus Christ as the Immaculate Conception. As every half-informed Catholic knows, Mary was the Immaculate Conception (conceived without sin), Jesus was the Miraculous Conception (conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit).How this novel came to be as popular as it is, I can understand. Everyone today is dying to get to the big TRUTH, something which can never be done in religion. Faith is by definition something that is unsubstantiated, we must just believe. What I can't understand is how people can believe this absolute drivel.


بغض النظر لو اتفقنا مع الموضوع ام اختلفنا فالعمل في حد ذاته مشوق كعمل بوليسي و كعمل تاريخي مع الحرص على العود الى مراجع اخرى للتأكد من المعلومات التاريخية الواردة فيه..هي رحلة عبر الفن من عصور التنوير و ما صاحبها من قمع و سلطة بابوية الى العصر الحديث مع بقاء هذه السلطة بشكل آخر..دان بروان اختار لنفسه نهج سبقه اليه آخرون في الكتابة الفاضحة التي تعري حقائق قد يرد البعض اخفائها و قد لا توجد اصلا انما اراد الكاتب لفت القارئ لعمله. يستحق القراءة


it's an action movie! it's a book! it's an action movie!it surprises me that the movie version was so dull, having such a simple adapted screenplay to write. this book reads like a blockbuster looks. and i will admit that i totally loved it while i was reading and forgot it promptly after, but i did the same when i watched vin diesel in XXX. it's a very fun read. it's horrendously written, the characters are rather shallow, there are enough chase scenes and things popping out of dark corners to satisfy anyone's juvenile appetite for suspense. and if you're catholic or knowledgeable at all about religion, it does provide some fodder for thought in between all the drama. but after you think, you realize that none of this information, true or not, is really that shocking and has little effect on the catholic faith. people would do well to learn about the nature and history of their belief system a little more. i still can't figure out how this book has caused so much controversy. let me rephrase that. i still can't figure out how people can be so oblivious and closeminded as to be scandalized by drivelly fiction. i was on an airplane a while ago and i sat next to a man reading "cracking the davinci code" or one of those other pissed off books that came out soon after. i asked him what he thought of the book. he said, 'oh! i've never read the da vinci code! it goes against the catholic church! why would i read such blasphemy? i just want to be armed with information when i speak to some simple-minded person who believes that heretic dan brown!" i wish i could make that kind of stuff up. i was silent, smiled and nodded, and quickly opened up Kavalier and Clay. i simply had no idea how to respond to someone who was taking notes on a book to collect information on a novel that he had never read so he could disprove the opinions of those who thought it was true. what?

Mohammed Arabey

شــفره دافنــشي***************اولا : زي ماقلت في ريفيو روايه: ملائكه وشياطين الروايه دي لو حابب تتمتع وانت بتقراها بجد ليها حل من الاتنين1- تقرأ النسخه الانجليزيه المصوره Illustrated Edition او2- وانت بتقرا النسخه تكون فاتح جوجل صور وتكتب اسم كل مكان بيزوره روبرت لانجدون وكل قاعه في اللوفر او لوحه او عمل فني لدافنشي او مخطوطاته وطبعا الكنائس كمان وتشوف صورتهم علي النتدي اهم لوحات الروايه وفيها سر اسرار الروايه وشفره دافنشي والحبكه كلهالوحه العشاء الاخير من اشهر اللوحات المثيره للجدل ربما منذ ان تحدثت عنها في عام 1997 روايهThe Templar Revelation Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christتاني تجربه ليا في اني اقرأ روايه مليانه تفاصيل ومعلومات حقيقيه مع دان براون والشخصيه الممتازه روبرت لانجدون وكملائكه وشياطين المعلومات في اطار تشويقي فعلا يخليك مستني تعرف المعلومه اللي بعدها وتحاول تبحث عن حقيقتها او اصلها علي الانترنت خاصا انها المره دي مثيره للجدل جداليست دينيه فحسب..بل كونيه "مثل حقائق الرقم المقدس فاي وغيرها"وايضا معلومات حرق الساحرات كانت رهيبه بربطها بخط الحقائق الخاصه بالروايه الاصليوالذي يجادل فيه ويكشف النقاب عن اسرار كثيره ازداد الجدل فيها حول المسيحيه بالاخص في اواخر القرن الماضي ليشتد حدته هذا الجدل بصدور هذه الروايه التي تصدرت مبيعات الكتب في العالموادت للعديد من الكتب ان تحاول تقليدها او الوصول لتلك المرحله التاريخيه وابسط مثال لمستفيدي هذا النجاح رواياتيوسف زيدان ظل الافعي و عزازيلمع ان دان براون نفسه روايته تعتبر متشابهه في الموضوع الجدلي كروايهThe Name of the Rose 1980ولكن لم تلق نصيبها من الشهره الواسعه الا عندما تم اطلاق عليها دعائيا "اصل روايه شفره دافنشي لدان براون""وربما تنبأ دان براون بهذا الاعتلاء علي عرش اعلي مبيعات الكتب اثناء كتابته للروايه بذكره لكتابين من اعلي مبيعات الكتب في العالم من قبله في الحوار التالي:الذي دار بين روبرت لانجدون الذي يريد نشر كتابه حول نظريته عن الكأس المقدسه وبين صديقه ناشر كتبه الذي يساله لماذا لم يحاول احد الكتاب من قبله نشر الحقائق التي كتبها لانجدون حول ذلك الموضوع""These books can't possibly compete with centuries of established history, especially when that history is endorsed by the ultimate bestseller of all time."Faukman's eyes went wide. "Don't tell me Harry Potter is actually about the Holy Grail.""I was referring to the Bible." ولندع الجدل الديني جانبا ونتكلم علي الروايهبالنسبه للشخصيات*****************مثل الروايه الاولي شخصيه روبرت لانجدون لم تخرج عن اطارها..نفس الدقه في رسم الشخصيه,قوه الملاحظه وتصرفه وقت المواقف المثيره..شخصيه ساحره فعلا هادئ ووقور و كمبيوتر رموز متنقلصوفي وماضيها الذي يطاردها منذ ان شاهدت جثه جدها تجد ان صوفي..جدها..الظابط..العالم..الكاهن..والمجرم التائب..دافنشي..وحتي مريم المجدليهكلها شخصيات مهمه في الاحداث يتم فك شفرتهم جميعا فصل فصللكل شخصيه شفره, شفره قد تكون..ماضي..سر دفين..رغبه..علاقه..شفره تنكشف لكبالنسبه للاحداث ***************الروايه متعدده وجهات النظر دائما تحتاج لبراعه في الكتابه...لم تنقص في هذه الروايه عن الروايه السابقه بل كانت مثيره اكثروالمره دي برضه الروايه كلها في يوم واحد او يوم ونصف لكن المكان اتغير ولايقل سحر عن روما والفاتيكان..المره دي بين باريس ليلا وانجلترا صباحاالاحداث هنا ايضا متلاحقه في فتره زمنيه تعتبر قصيره بالنسبه لروايه ضخمه..ولكن الحبكه تختلف..فهذه المره لانجدون هو المطارد من قبل الشرطه الفرنسيه وليس مساعدا للشرطه كما كان في الفاتيكانمره اخري الاسلوب السينمائي المتلاحقالوصف الذي لايفوقه الا الصور الملونه في النسخه المصوره من الروايهIllustrated Editionالهروب والاختفاء في اخر لحظهNarrow Escapesكان كثيرا جدا في الروايه "واللي نجح الفيلم نجاحه الوحيد في ابرازها سينمائيا" الموضوع ده زاد الاثاره في الروايه دي عن سابقتهافي النهايه انسوا الفيلم تماما وابدأوا بالروايه .. حتي لو كان توم هانكس مبدع ..المخرج عبقري..حيفضل دان براون افضل مؤلف ومخرج وممثل علي الورق..محمد العربيالاسكندريه من 10 مارس 2013الي 19 مارس 2013The English ReviewFirst of all I hate Action books, thriller and just action novels. I hate book would got that much of Facts that can sometimes got the equal pages of the novels events itself..I love fiction ,I adore fiction with a hint of fantasy ,that make me escapes of our realistic, raw, ugly most of times, unpleasant world to another different one ..I'm a big fan of Harry Potter -although J.K. Rowling successfully made me read her greedy, realistic, raw, ugly most of times, unpleasant world on The Casual Vacancyand even loving it - So what kind of magic does Dan Brown got to make me fall in love with Robert Langdon's adventures?*Is it his mixing and blending the real historical events with his non-stop thriller "fiction". I know some of the historical events he mention are true and some are not-or are they!? :)-?*Is it the characters itself? The Mickey Mouse watch is amazing touch -as a Disney's big fan- *Is it the talented story telling and the easy swift from a POV to another? *or Is it the melting of the wall between the Hard and Row REAL Facts,Historical Events and Symbols meanings and Enjoying reading about it -WITHOUT being an expert or even interested to know about them from the start- All of what I can say is that the search and hunt of that kind of a thriller novel,A SMART thriller is set for me by Dan Brown with these 2 novels "Angels and Demons" and the squeal "The Da Vinci Code"


Fellow Goodreaders, I have a confession to make. (Strikes Abe Lincoln pose). No, I haven't actually read it, if that's what you're thinking. But, in a way, it's worse. The fact is, I... er... I... I'm sorry, this is rather difficult for me... I once, ah, I once wrote a letter to a national newspaper supporting Dan Brown's book. And had it published. OK, I've said it, and now I feel better. (Wipes sweat from forehead). I tried to find the offending item just now on Google, but it looks as though well-meaning people have done their best to hide the evidence. I'd really like to thank them for that. Anyway, if you search on my name and "Da Vinci Code" or "Dan Brown", you'll find pointers to it, though I've so far been unable to retrieve the actual text.As far as I can recall, the background was roughly as follows. A columnist in the Independent, Christina Patterson, had written an article in which she dismissively attacked The Da Vinci Code, and cited a recent interview with the author. Mr Brown had been asked why he thought his book was a success, and had said something about how he believed that what people liked was books with "puzzles and treasure hunts". Patterson remarked with evident contempt that there were no puzzles and treasure hunts in, if I'm remembering correctly, Shakespeare, Dickens or Tolstoy.Well... I'm a big fan of due process. I thought Saddam Hussein was a monster who deserved death fifty times over; but I opposed the Iraq War on the grounds that virtually the only bad thing he hadn't done was to harbor secret weapons of mass destruction, which was the ostensible reason for invading his country. My feelings about Dan Brown were similar. So the letter pointed out that Ms. Patterson was just cherry-picking her authors. As far as I was aware, she was quite correct in saying that Shakespeare, Dickens and Tolstoy didn't do puzzles and treasure-hunts; but if she'd wanted to argue the contrary position, she could just as easily have cited Lewis Carroll, James Joyce and Vladimir Nabokov. The real problem with Dan Brown was not the subject matter, but the quality of the writing.Sigh. I thought I'd better come clean. I'd rather that you hear it from me directly than, you know, just stumble over it by accident when you're following a random link. Maybe, some day, you'll be able to forgive me. And while we're talking about Dan Brown and random links, check this out. It's much funnier than my so-called review.

Tea Jovanović

Čitav svet je poludeo za ovom knjigom... I dalje mi nije jasno zašto... Mislim da je pisana za prosečnog neobrazovanog Amerikanca kome je autor sažvakavao istoriju i ti delovi su me bolno smorili... Uvek sam pre za čitanje knjige nego gledanje filma po istoimenoj knjizi... U ovom slučaju prednost dajem Tomu Henksu i filmu... Film kraće traje i preskočene su lekcije iz istorije :)


Caveat Academics!!!I won't belabor the obvious, as it's been done quite well by other reviewers, but I just couldn't stand not to add my own "hear hear!" to the fray. If you're going to create a character who is an expert, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make sure you check your facts! Whoever edited this drivel ought to be sewn in a sack with a rabid raccoon and flung into Lake Michigan.And just as a matter of good taste - your expert should not be an expert in everything under the sun. That's one of the hallmarks of poor writing.Even if I were not a practicing pagan, I would find it stretching credibility that every single item the characters run across is a symbol of goddess worship. Five pointed star? Goddess worship. Chalice? Goddess worship. Porcelain toilet bowl? Goddess worship. Pilot ball point pen? Goddess worship. You get the general idea. Not only is every item part of the mythology of the divine feminine, but every number is also part of the divine feminine. Hello? Is a cigar NEVER just a cigar? And some of the claims of symbolism are just plain wrong, as the editor would have found out if he'd bothered to do some fact checking. Remember those military chevrons that, because of the way they were pointed, represented the female divine and those poor slobs of soldiers had been running around all these countless centuries with goddess symbols flaunted on their uniforms without knowing it? The only problem with that premise is that the chevrons facing in their current direction is relatively recent - according to my military historian husband, they faced the OPPOSITE direction for quite some time before being reversed (for what reason, I have no idea...unless the generals all got together and decided they didn't have quite enough goddess symbols on their uniforms and needed it fixed post haste).My theology professor ended up traveling around the country giving talks about this book to thousands of interested people. He loves the book if only because he's now giving pretty much the same information that he used to give to dozing freshman and sophomores to packed theaters of interested listeners. He tells a story about being somewhere in southern Ohio and making a joking remark about the celice being something that all Catholics wore and how now the secret was out, and there was a lady in the back row who elbowed her husband and said "See? I told you so!" The increased interest in history is about the only positive thing that's come out of this book. Honestly, you don't need to make anything up about the Catholic church to point out that it's been the source of some horrible things.I could go on about the poor research and editing in this book, but others have done a pretty thorough job of finding the problems with it.If you want a decent page turner, go for it. If you want something well researched and accurate, give this one a big ol' pass.


Worst. Book. Ever.

Seth Hahne

For cheap supermarket fiction, this sure was cheap supermarket fiction. It would have helped if this was the first book I had ever read. Unfortunately, having read Curious George as a child (a towering work of literary genius by comparison), The DaVinci Code suffered perhaps unjustly.


I freely admit that my disdain for The Da Vinci Code is my own personal backlash over its popularity. Dan Brown isn't a terrible writer, despite facing that charge from many experienced readers. He has a likable style, and he drives the pace of the book relentlessly, which is exactly what one would want from a pulpy adventure that one can take to the beach. Likewise, the charge that The Da Vinci Code is somehow a failure because it is in any way inaccurate or unbelievable is unfair. The story is fiction, after all, and one should expect to have his/her credulity stretched, especially when reading pulp that is written with the screen in mind (as The Da Vinci Code surely was).I even enjoyed the Sunday afternoon it took me to read The Da Vinci Code. It was an absolute waste of time and exactly what I wanted to be doing, sitting on a comfy sofa, drinking tea and reading about self-flagellating albino monks (and other fun things).I've given many books that are just as good as The Da Vinci Code and even some that are worse three stars, and I meant every star. The truth is that on its own merits, I'd have given The Da Vinci Code a similar rating if not for a repeated experience that led to my backlash.At the beginning of every semester, in a bid to get to know my students better, I play a memory game wherein the students provide me with their favourite things (books, food, music) and some personal details (people they hate, people they love, things they are proud of), then I connect something about them, something that stands out for me, with their name. It is a good start in getting to know the students, but it has also led to my hatred for Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code.A good half of the students that enter my courses declare that they don't have favourite books, and/or they've only ever read three books in their lives -- two involuntary (both assigned by an English teacher, and always seeming to include To Kill a Mockingbird) and one voluntary (The Da Vinci Code). What pisses me off most is that even if these people liked The Da Vinci Code, Brown's novel didn't spur them on to read more. They read the The Da Vinci Code, enjoyed it or didn't, then went back to their reading apathy. Moreover, if I could convince people to read one book voluntarily, one book for their pleasure, it would not be ANY cheesy, pulpy, low grade adventure story. It's like pouring a glass of $9 dollar wine for a person who is trying wine for the first time. They may enjoy the glass, but they're not going to choose wine as their alcohol of choice based on Fortant de France. And for that reason, I hate The Da Vinci Code. It is the cheap wine that keeps people away from the joy of good wine, and while I admit that it is the fault of popular culture rather than Dan Brown, each reader I find who stops at The Da Vinci Code makes me hate the book a little bit more.


For the most part, it seems that people either passionately love this book or they passionately hate it. I happen to be one of the former. For my part, I don't see the book so much as an indictment of the Catholic Church in particular but of religious extremism and religion interfering in political process in general. The unwarranted political control granted to extreme religious organizations like the CBN is an issue that we will be forced to address one way or the other. To my eye, our political process has been poisoned by it and the danger of theocracy is quite real. Furthermore, Brown's indictment of the Church for removing or suppressing feminine divinity figures is justified and needs a much closer look. Women do not have enough of a role in religion, religious practice, heroic myths, and creation myths, nor are they portrayed as divinity figures enough. In short, our religious systems and institutions lack balance and have a bias to suppress issues, stories, and roles that empower women to live as equals to men. Finally, Brown wrote his story simplistically, in my view, to spread his tale to as broad an audience as possible. Though it is not as pristine a narrative as, say, Umberto Eco, the message it conveys is one that needs to be heard. More obscure books on the matter are not as accessible as Da Vinci Code and if someone were to write an accessible book of genius on this subject, I would give him/her all due praise. In the meantime, Dan Brown is telling a story that needs to be told. It is one that has been kept quiet and in the dark for far too long.

Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *