Are Dan browns writings completely fictional? Because there are

File: templar-revelation.jpg (116KB, 321x495px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 321x495px

>>18646997

You should perhaps look into Brown's own acknowledged source.

Asshole Dan Brown stole everything from the "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" series.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Brown#Copyright_infringement_cases

>>18647891
Came to post this exact thing.
Fuck Dan Brown

I had read Holy Blood Holy Grail and then when normies were all "muh DaVinci Code" I was like, You mean Holy Blood Holy Grail and was met with nothing but blank stares.

Dan Brown is an asshole

>>18647929
It's true. I'm an asshole

>>18647891
>>18647929

The authors tried to sue Brown for plagiarism and lost. Brown himself admitted to getting ideas from the Picknett and Prince book. It's not as familiar to people as Holy Blood, Holy Grail though so it never gets the credit it deserves.

>>18647979
>Brown himself admitted to getting ideas from the Picknett and Prince book.

[ citation need ]

>>18647987

Brown's own court testimony, dipshit.

>>18648008
In other words you got nothing.

>>18647934
Haha!

>>18646997
FUCKING LURK MORE FAGGOT!
>CANCER THREAD
SAGE
SAGE
SAGE

File: foucaultspendulum.jpg (42KB, 322x475px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 322x475px

>>18646997
Umberto Eco debunked Dan Brown's bullshit 15 years before it was even written.

>>18648017
you can look it up yourself you plebbit piece of shit

The authors of Holy Blood Holy Grail can't claim copy right because they claim thier story to be true. If say their book is fictional then they would have a case. If they would just admit that its fake pseudo history maybe, but then they no longer are credible in the eyes of their followers.