A Missing Link in the DaVinci Code

by Joey Clarke

Straight off: I haven’t read the book or seen the movie – yet. I have, however, seen most of the going documentaries, and have processed a good deal of analysis, especially from the internet. I’m also conversant with the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, whose authors recently attempted to sue DaVinci Code author Dan Brown for plagiarism. So the material is familiar enough. Anyway, the book itself is not what I want to discuss.

The premise, albeit well known, bears reiteration. The Roman Catholic Church is covering up crucial facts about Jesus: He was married with children; His descendants sat on the mighty thrones of Europe; the spiritual system he intended included female ministers and worship of the feminine. These are the issues that command most of the discussion as I have encountered it.

But this is not to be my discussion either, although they are worthy topics. Many people have been made to think seriously about what they really believe, which is surely good for us, individually and collectively.

Whether the items I have listed as the premise of the DaVinci Code are historical facts, is not a question I propose to tackle; suffice it to say there appear to be gaps in our traditional notions about the life of Jesus. Already scholars generally agree that a certain amount of garbling – malicious or not – took place between the actual life and what we know about it. But I can’t see where any of Dan Brown’s propositions need alter one’s faith in Jesus (unless there is some specific problem with God-as-Man having sex and being a father). I also wonder whether we are too easily fascinated by exotic Gospel-stories without really knowing what is in the conventional ones. But maybe there is a repository of secret knowledge; and, world-controlling secret societies aside, the Roman Catholic Church is perhaps the largest and oldest organisation around. The Vatican sounds as likely a place for earth-shaking secrets as any – and more likely than most. Who else has a hand so deep in history’s mysteries? The multi-million-dollar question is: what exactly would their secrets be?

One of the ancient stories repeated in some of the Code-related material I have encountered is that the Magdalene arrived on the shores of southern France, with an “Egyptian” girl, who is revealed to be Jesus’ daughter. It is striking that the child, unlike the other people in the paintings I saw, is of a nice coffee-colour, and is said to be “Egyptian”. And this is Jesus’ daughter. Hmmm. So… Jesus really was a non-white?

Now there might be a secret. Forget feminism; all mainstream Christian Churches are trying to move with the socio-political times, acknowledging the equality of women as far as their dogmas allow. But on the question of Jesus’ race, there is often the retreat into universalist haze: “It doesn’t matter what race He was; what’s important is who He was.” There’s some merit in this, but it’s limited. Maybe our attitude would be different if we had a more definite idea of what He was actually like. We have a definite idea of what Ghandi was like, and Francis of Assisi, and Muhammad, and the Buddha, and we associate each man’s particular brand of holiness with his upbringing, the place he lived in, and everything else – race included. And yet, every one had a universal message, and still has universal appeal.

Does it help or hinder our appreciation of Jesus that most of us have a hard-wired idea of the gentle, handsome, bearded euro-Jesus, looking more like an Italian painter than a middle eastern peasant? We resist it, we acknowledge what we know to be the truth. We speak sagely of our higher understanding. Then, we meet a fair-skinned man with flowing hair and a beard, and are ready to cast him in the Passion.

So: working with much the same information as Dan Brown, and utilising our imagination to with similar liberty, why don’t we try out our own church-shaking expose/whim: sure Jesus was married, and sure His children ruled Europe. But more importantly, according to this conspiracy theory, He was a man of colour, and wed to someone of another race, perhaps a European Roman (which might explain her connections in the French Riviera?), and probably rich (remember, expositionists are fond of noting that the women who followed Jesus appear to have bankrolled His Ministry, and that the Magdalene is always listed first). Was race-mixing normal in Roman Palestine? The impression one gets (especially in the Old Testament) is that Jews were against it. Class-mixing was certainly uncommon. Maybe this was another one of the rules Jesus broke. Maybe that was another reason the religious leaders and the Roman governor wanted Him dead. After all, wasn’t His ancestor David the great-grandson of a Moabite?

Maybe Leonardo DaVinci was indeed the prank-playing, code-planting head of the Priory of Sion. Even so, he would probably not care to plant any codes about Jesus being a black man; after all, he was white himself, and a not-disinterested part of the European power-structure. Maybe that was the line beyond which he was not prepared to go. Or not allowed to go.

After all, could the powerful economies that still run things have become what they are without the toil of the conquered? Could the power of their own populations have been harnessed in the Middle Ages if there had not been Jews and Gypsies (Egyptians) to hate? And could any of that been possible if we knew the truth? Hmmm…

My novel, Code of Many Colours, begins when an Ethiopian archaeologist is found murdered near to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem, with a white hood tied over his head. The matter is investigated by Shabazz Washington, a troubled, complex race-historian from Howard University. Along the way, he falls in with the beautiful and mysterious Svetlana Soyuz, who is investigating for the Orthodox Church. They are pursued by the insidious Beavis Manson, who joined the neo-Nazis in prison, and was instrumental in giving the Papacy to the furthest thing from Jesus since 1054 (when the Roman and Orthodox Churches split) instead of to a well-loved African Cardinal, or even the one from Chile. Our heroes uncover the connection between the white hood of the KKK and sacrificial traditions from Southern Spain, reveal for the first time in human history (again) a blood-connection between Haile Sellassie and Jesus (from their common ancestor David), and prove conclusively that the House of Shoa has a better claim to the throne of England than the House of Windsor.

Actually, if anybody can write this one faster than me, please do; there might be entertainment value and we could provoke some serious thought and discussion. Maybe we can get beyond Jesus’ sex life and deeper into who He really was, what He really did and said, and, given that, what He means to us now.

Over to you.

10 Responses to “A Missing Link in the DaVinci Code”


  • That comment was thought provoking for someone who has not seen the movie, nor read the book.

    This is in no way a challenge, as you implied in your summary. It is a comment from someone who has read the book and has no interest in seeing the movie at this time. The book it self, written by Dan Brown was very intriguing, however towards the end the thrill of the chase, that’s what kept my interest, was lost.

    I am someone, who’s easily drawn to the art world, be it museums with its paintings, drawings, sculptures, so it was a good read for me.

    As far as the truth about Jesus’ roots, love, sex life…I was never interested in that. I know that this feeling stems from how I was raised by my God-fearing grandmother… to just believe what I read in the bible and what my elders say. I am trying to branch out of that system and realize that the bible is telling a story by Godly inspired men. I am not sure of what’s left out and what was edited etc. but I know when it comes to me needing someone to lean on…I resort right back to the God I know, the savior I know. That belief is so strong in my heart that I’ve seen opened doors when I pray to the Lord up above and I know things that I have not received in life thus far, is because I will receive it when “He” sees it fit in his infinite timing. This may all sound cliché, but after speaking to numerous Buddhists, Muslims, Afro-Centrists, etc I believe that religion is what keeps us separate…the word of God, your God-conscious mind allows you to know what’s right and what’s wrong. We can go on and on about who is right and who is wrong. What is our purpose for living, or is it all in vain? I will like your feedback.

  • My comment… There is a natural intrigue for the DaVinci Code by those who are admires of art, those who have a picture of the last supper at their dinner table, Catholism, Christianity, Doubters, Believers… How do we secure what we already know in our heart and soul…Know that God is in you and there is a purpose for living?

  • My relationship with Jesus is different than what was fed to me; i have my own ideas about what happened in His life, why He was here, etc. I try not to push them on anybody else, for a peaceful life, and because it’s my view alone. Though it surprises some who know me, i still like to worship with catholics, and still call myself a christian.

    I belong to a group where we discuss “God as i/you understand Him”. Here i meet hindus, christians, muslims and “unaffiliated”, all of whom have their own personal relationship with the Higher Power. I think this is the way to approach “different” religions; they’re not all that different.

    As you mention, it’s “religion” that causes separation, and usually it’s not even the core of the religion, but usually some little idiosyncracy in the dogma, like: don’t eat pork, or you must worship on (some)day, etc, etc. It’s up to the individual to find a peaceful place when dealing with other individuals.

    Faith appears to come easier to you than some people; many i have met, although they may have received as thorough a grounding as you (or me), have a hard time believing in something/someone when the historical “facts” are uncertain.

    For me, i had to ride all the way down through the valley of doubt, into the deep pit of denial, and across the wasteland of secular humanism, in order to stand here where i am confident in my belief; confident enough to defend myself, but not so arrogant to push it on anyone.

    But, you ask, what is our purpose for living? Or is it all in vain?

    The modern answer is that we are here to perpetuate our species and continue evolving our civilisation. The spiritual answer is that we are here to praise God. I subscribe to both; i find the evolution of our civilisation and the development of our minds is a marvellous worship. There’s another answer to that question, the pollyanna answer – we are here to be happy.

    Actually, i like that one best. And i think it includes the other two as well.

  • Right off I can see that you did not read the Bible, Jesus is not a decendant of David or any human. Mary conceived Jesus by the HOLY Spirit. So the real question is of what race was the Holy Spirit? Now before responding remember Jesus warning that Blaspheme againt the Holy Spirit will NOT be Forgiven. If it is truth that you seek, find the original script of the book of the ACTS and transulate it with Modern English (Scientific terms) concentrating on PENTECOST. The Muslims has this right GOD IS GREAT.

  • According to Gospel writers, Jesus was descended from David. Check Luke and Matthew, who both give genaologies.

    I’m not afraid of blaspheming the spirit, but your question is foolish. The way you are expressing your belief proves the point that “religion” creates division.

    It will surprise you to know that i have an extensive knowledge with the christian bible, the quran, and much else. I’ll agree that God is great, but i don’t know if that’s something the muslims have more right than the rest of us.

    Calm down; and don’t worry about other people’s perception of truth.

  • How did Luke know who was Jesus’s bio father?

  • I am sorry if I Offended you. Poor writing skills I guest. My bible says that Joseph and Mary were of the house of David. I can not fine where is says that Jesus was Joseph’s son. I never said that Muslims was more right just that it is right. I was hoping that you would read the bible for your self and with your clear ability to find what other people missed you would catch what really happened. If any body was of Afican decent in the bible it would be Moses. Read his wife’s description of him to her Father. One of Solomon’s son was Ethiopian.
    But out side of the Bible a very interest study was done using DNA Markers from bones of ancient graves that traces man’s trek across the globe. It seems that all of our ancestors Migrated from southern Africa. First Migration was across the sea east to Australia and southern India. The second was much later north wards to central Asia ie Iran/ Iraq. Then way later From Central Asia in a starbust formation to North East and South East Asia and Northern India. Then Later to Europe. Then from North East Asia to North America.
    This actually matches Genesis. Edan was South Africa. Cain went East of Edan. Noah sailed to Iran/Iraq much later. Noah children went in all directions from there. Then Adam was the father of the Depok Tribe “the little brown bush man of Botswana” . They still live there today and their DNA Markers can be found in every Human. I think the book was called the Journey of Man. It’s an interesting read.

  • I don’t know how important it is, but remember that in Roman times, even if you adopt someone, that person is supposed to carry your “descent”, as in the case of a Levirate marriage; making your widowed sister-in-law pregnant to carry on your brother’s line. But really, i don’t know how important the Jesus-David-HIM connection is to the current price of cheese; it was just a minor point in an essay i was writing for pleasure.

    If it comes down to it, everybody in the Bible, the Gita, the Quran and everybody else descended from someone who came out of africa (your “little brown man”).

    With the “Code” and everything else, my issue is only that we are very quick to follow certain lines of thought, and not others. I must get my hands on “Journey of Man”; this is not the first time my attention has been drawn to it.

    And by the way, i’m not offended! (grin!)

  • Fascinating! Thanks Martin

Comments are currently closed.