LONDON - The lawyer representing two historians, including a New Zealander, who accuse Dan Brown of copying their work in his best-seller "The Da Vinci Code" told a British court today he suspected the author had lied in his evidence.
Brown, in the witness box for a second day, was forced
to defend his assertion that he had not read "The Holy Blood, and the Holy Grail" when he came up with the idea for his thriller.
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, co-authors of the 1982 "Holy Blood" book, who are suing Brown's British publisher Random House, allege that he lifted their ideas wholesale.
Part of Brown's defence has been to say he wrote the synopsis for "The Da Vinci Code", one of the most successful novels with sales of around 40 million copies, before he became familiar with the "Holy Blood" book.
"You acquired a copy of 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' before you accept in your evidence you did," said the historians' lawyer Jonathan Rayner James. "There are very few dates, let alone exact dates, in your witness statement."
Brown, 41, said neither he nor his wife, Blythe, who is also his assistant, had used ideas from the book for his synopsis.
There are seven books listed in the partial bibliography for "The Da Vinci Code" synopsis, written in January 2001, but "Holy Blood" is not among them.
"That is the clear piece of evidence to me that "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" was not around when I wrote the synopsis," said Brown, adding it would have been in his interest to add the work to his bibliography in order to impress his publisher.
Both books share the idea of Jesus marrying and having a child by Mary Magdalene and their bloodline being protected by the mysterious Priory of Sion, a theory greeted with outrage by some Roman Catholic leaders.
The publicity-shy author was forced to answer questions in the full glare of the world's media for a second day.
Unable to cope with the number of reporters and fans trying to watch Brown, court officials have asked journalists to reserve seats in the gallery. British courts normally work on a first-come, first-served basis.
When asked why his copy of "Holy Blood" was so heavily annotated, Brown said he used it for a "refresher course" he and his wife underwent after the publication of "The Da Vinci Code".
Brown joked that prior to "The Da Vinci Code" and the almost overnight fame it brought, he had been used to attending book signings where five people would turn up, three of whom would be book store employees who had taken pity on him.
Brown admits he used "Holy Blood" when he wrote "The Da Vinci Code", but that it was only one of several sources and he did not copy its "central themes".
"I have never been shy about saying 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' is part of this," Brown said. "The whole Teabing section of the book -- those are the sorts of snippets of information that 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' is very good on."
Leigh Teabing, a character in the novel, is an anagram of the claimants in the case, and the 1982 work is referred to in the narrative.
Brown is expected to give evidence again on Wednesday and the case is due to end on Monday. It could be weeks before judgment is pronounced.
- REUTERS
Dan Brown
LONDON - The lawyer representing two historians, including a New Zealander, who accuse Dan Brown of copying their work in his best-seller "The Da Vinci Code" told a British court today he suspected the author had lied in his evidence.
Brown, in the witness box for a second day, was forced
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.