So, is the novel an accurate depiction of the history it claims to record?  Remember that the book opens with the assertion that its depictions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals are accurate.  Before we move to the main subjects of the book, let's consider a few test cases.

First, let's deal with the title of the book.  Mr. Brown's characters frequently refer to the artist as DaVinci.  But his name was Leonardo.  He was born outside Vinci, a village near Florence in central Italy.  "DaVinci" simply means "from Vinci."  And so art historians all call him "Leonardo," not "DaVinci."  No Harvard symbologist and art historian, real or fictional, would call him "DaVinci."  This would be like calling Jesus of Nazareth, "of Nazareth."

Later Mr. Brown states, "Originally, Tarot had been devised as a secret means to pass along ideologies banned by the Church.  Now, Tarot's mystical qualities were passed on by modern fortune-tellers" (p. 92).  The historical fact is that Tarot cards were invented for innocent gaming purposes in the 15th century.  They did not acquire occult associations until the late 18th century.  The cards' suites carry no Grail symbolism whatever.

In a dramatic plot twist, one of the characters encounters "Job 38:11."  Mr. Brown writes, "It was only seven words.  Confused, he read it again, sensing something had gone terribly wrong.  The verse simply read: Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further" (p. 129).  The scene is indeed moving.  But the verse is not "only seven words."  Here is the entire Scripture: "when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt'?"

Still later, the book describes Noah this way: "Noah of the Ark.  An albino.  Like you, he had skin white like an angel" (p. 167).  Nowhere does the Bible describe Noah as an albino.  Apparently Mr. Brown took his idea from the non-canonical 1 Enoch 106:2.

And note that Leigh Teabing, the renowned historian, describes Joseph of Arimathea as "Jesus' trusted uncle" (p. 255).  But nothing in the Bible or early historical tradition suggests this connection.

Of course, none of these issues is central to the book's plot or to Christian belief.  But such factual inaccuracies do call into question the book's claims to historical accuracy.