History has a very-"as the majority remembers" nature. I was originally going to write about this in my review of STAR WARS (IV: A NEW HOPE), but it especially holds true for The Da Vinci Code.
In STAR WARS, it was made apparent (after having seen the whole sexology) in a more-"as the elder-dude remembers" way. While watching it for (I'm sure) the infinitieth time today, I thought to myself, 'Maybe that's what Heaven is: the past as you want to remember it." Sure, Obi-Wan could have heavily regretted urging Yoda and Qui-Gon to accept Skywalker into the Jedi Order; but instead he simply metamorphosed the tragic change into a circumstance for which he could not be blamed, because (I'm sure he knew) the Bright Side would always find its way to the top.
But Dan Brown's presentation of the nature of history (obviously seen and magnified by Oklahoma's favorite son [other than me] Ron Howard) is the best 'harsh reality' I've seen since The Neverending Story's Gmork, with his, 'It is easy to control people who are without hope.'
Without hope, people will take whatever history you can feed them with a helping of just enough logic.
But Brown's and Howard's message comes with a caveat: the tuning fork that seems to make history more-believable---the famed name. For instance, I could tell you that 'some guy' was crucified, murdered, buried, re-enlivened and living in the hills, and you'ld be like, "Whoa, another Frankenstein-monster ... anything on cable tonight?" But if that 'some guy' had a name, you'ld be more-inclined to believe that it was an actual person that did all that stuff.
Furthermore, we might actually be living in a Caribbean territory overrun by English pirates: except ... ummm ... Samuel Adams! ... ummm ... Thomas Jefferson! ... ummm ... Benjamin Franklyn! ... ummm ... Abraham Lincoln! and all sorts of other names I could throw at you here.