Mr. Lincoln Channels Saint One Out Of Four Times In England

[rubyfelixir]

IT IS A HARD PASS
FOR TEMPTATION

Lincoln the Mis-Leader
tempts the viewer to enter
the barrow of a devil.
Is it tempting?
It is not,
according to
Mr. Lincoln.

Do you know what the most baffling development of the modern mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau is?
The most baffling development is a derailment of all modern research into the mystery, at the moment of the introduction of the mystery to an English audience. It is the devilry of the erasure, and then the re-location, by Henry Lincoln, to England, of the painting titled 'The Temptation of Saint Anthony' by the artist David Teniers the Younger!
This painting by Teniers is one of two paintings that is identified in the Large Parchment Cipher Message by the partial use of each paintings' title, and the sur-name of the artist of each painting. The reader might think that, as this painting is one of two paintings that are referred to in a secret cipher message, that this painting is then significant to the mystery, and is of as equal importance to the mystery as the other painting by the other artist.
Yet, in Henry Lincoln's first documentary about Rennes-le-Chateau, a documentary in which Mr. Lincoln has full knowledge of the content of the Large Cipher Message, and of this painting and of the artist of this painting, this painting is
NOT NAMED
nor
TALKED ABOUT
by Mr. Lincoln! I guess... that Mr. Lincoln just wasn't tempted.
Due to the omission of this information by Mr. Lincoln of a second painting, the English viewer at that time had no idea that there is another painting of equal importance to the mystery.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkMaGA0HDxs
CHRONICLE
The Lost Treasure of Jerusalem?
Feb 12, 1972

QUOTE HENRY LINCOLN
Of the four parchments that gave Sauniere The Key, only two remain. Even so, this parchment can open for us one more door. There's an extremely complicated cipher concealed in the inter-polated letters. In part it tells us that POUSSIN HOLDS THE KEY. Poussin?
When Sauniere was given the de-cipherment in Paris, he brought a copy of Poussin's picture, Les Bergeres d'Arcadie, The Arcadian Shepherds. Painted in Rome, around-about 1640, it has so far been held by art-historians to be the pure product of Poussin's imagination. The shepherds are studying an inscription on the tomb - ET IN ARCADIA EGO, "Even in Arcadie, I, Death, am present."
In some way, this must throw a light on Sauniere's story.
Sauniere, as we know, concerned himself with two inscriptions. [...]
END QUOTE


A sequel documentary on the subject by Henry Lincoln was broad-cast to the English viewer two years later. The two year wait between the original documentary and the new documentary meant that, for two years, Mr. Lincoln had an exclusive advantage over all of the other English researchers of the mystery. Mr. Lincoln had possession of the fully de-ciphered cipher message, and he knew about the Teniers painting, a painting that Mr. Lincoln had chosen not to inform the viewer about in the first documentary.

In the second documentary, Mr. Lincoln finally revealed to the viewer the fully de-ciphered Large Cipher Message, and the de-cipher's reference to a second painting, but the information about the name of the painting and about the name of the artist was at last revealed to the viewer only for the painting to be immediately appropriated by Mr. Lincoln, and re-located out of France, across the English Channel, to England!

What? Wait a minute...

[rubyfelixir]

CONTINUED...

Mr. Lincoln has just stolen an art-work, from a national art-museum, no less, which was all captured on camera, by the way. It's 1911 all over again! Under the pretense of filming a documentary about two interior decorators, and one infernal decoration, Mr. Lincoln has disappeared a painting! In England, Mr. Lincoln claims to have found the painting, and exposes two men in a private moment in a public announcement. But the painting is a copy, made by the English!

Mr. Lincoln has committed two crimes. A theft of art, and a theft of identity. By changing the location of the painting, Mr. Lincoln has changed the identity of the painting. By changing the identity of the painting, Mr. Lincoln has appropriated a part of the French mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau, as an English mystery, for England!

WTH just happened?

CHRONICLE
The Priest, the Painter and the Devil
Oct 30, 1974

QUOTE HENRY LINCOLN
Remember that SHEPHERDESS had been linked with POUSSIN in our elaborate ciphered message. But the Poussin shepherds were not all that I found at Shugborough. The message had also referred to TENIERS and NO TEMPTATION. This had always seemed to be a link with Teniers' many versions of the Temptation of Saint Anthony, but NO TEMPTATION was odd. However, at Shugborough, there was one more copy of a 17th-century painting, and it was a copy of a Teniers. Not the Temptation of Saint Anthony, but Saint Anthony, and Saint Jerome, the only Saint Anthony theme in which he is NOT being TEMPTED. PAS DE TENTATION! - NO TEMPTATION! And as confirmation, in the back-ground, there is a shepherdess! SHEPHERDESS, NO TEMPTATION, POUSSIN AND TENIERS HOLD THE KEY. Co-incidence can only go so far. So Shugborough confirms the links between the painters and their works which were indicated by the ciphered message. The Poussin has provided us with many more tangible clues than the Teniers, so I concentrated on that. Remember, when we looked at the real land-scape, how there was a mountain-slope behind the tomb which is not there in the painting, but a line of cloud seems to match that slope. I had to go back to Paris [...]
END QUOTE


Note, that in this documentary, Mr. Lincoln refers TWO TIMES to the painting at the Hall as a 'COPY'. This painting in England was not painted by Teniers. It is a COPY, made by an artist who is NOT Teniers, of a painting that was done by Teniers. Do not be tempted by it. Infact, you can't be, as it is, as Mr. Lincoln has explained, NOT a TEMPTATION. Yet, this painting tempts researchers again and again. Researchers seem to forget that it is a copy, and only remember that it is a TENIERS.

So, when, after two years, Mr. Lincoln is, at last, forced by his own work to reveal to the public that there is a second painting, he feints. Horrified, he waves his arms in the air, and then, jabbing an index finger at a painting in England, he then dis-abuses the viewer of the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau.
"Regarde! Over here! Here it is! This is definitely that painting that is named in the Large Cipher! This COPY! By an artist who is NOT named in the Large Cipher! An artist in ENGLAND! A location that is also NOT named in the Large Cipher. Yes! The artist is an English-ma... What! The artist is an ENGLISH-WOMAN? Bullshi-beeeeeeeeeep!"

In this documentary, following this affair at the Hall, Mr. Lincoln then leaves the English Temptation, and England, and RETURNS TO FRANCE, to his first love, a shepherdess, named Paris, apparently, and that's it for the Teniers painting! Mr. Lincoln races to Paris, and to the national art-museum, The Louvre, to look at X-ray photographs of the other painting, by the other artist. Mr. Lincoln is hot for his X!

[rubyfelixir]

CONTINUED...

In this documentary about a painter, Mr. Lincoln appears to travel from France, to go to England, to find a painting by Teniers, and then
he travels from England, to return to France, to go to Paris, to look at a different painting by a different artist in The Louvre. The arc of this journey and its express purpose is ironic. It is ironic because Mr. Lincoln is now in The Louvre, which is in France, and,
in that ART-MUSEUM, in FRANCE,
there is not just one, but
TWO
PAINTINGS,
by DAVID TENIERS THE YOUNGER,
of The Temptation of Saint Anthony!

Yet, when now in The Louvre, Mr. Lincoln is not tempted tell the viewer about the two paintings, or to show the two paintings to the viewer. After all, after going to England, Mr. Lincoln now has NO TEMPTATION! Mr. Lincoln visits The Louvre to look at a painting, but he only has eyes for his first love, the other painting, by the other artist.

Mr. Lincoln has pod-peopled not just ONE temptation painting, but TWO temptation paintings, for ONE painting that does not depict a temptation.
He has pod-peopled two paintings that are by Teniers, for one painting that is a COPY made by an artist who is NOT Teniers, of a painting that is by Teniers.
He has pod-peopled two paintings that are in France, at a public museum in the capital city, where they could of been seen by Sauniere, for a painting that is not in France, but in England, a country that Sauniere never went to.

Having abducted, and then alienated, the pod-peopled painting, Mr. Lincoln then ignores it, which is in contrast to the amount of attention and the amount of time that Mr. Lincoln lavishes on the other painting, and the other artist, an effort that extends to an attempt to PHYSICALLY place the other artist and the other painting at a real location in the country-side from which the village of Rennes-le-Chateau can be seen by the other artist, so that the other artist can put the village in the other painting!

I am not saying that the other painter did not visit the area to view a tomb and put it in a painting, but, I mean,
come on,
the temptation depicted in the painting by Teniers is set in a cave. What, Mr. Lincoln? You couldn't find a CAVE near Rennes-le-Chateau that you could have declared to be the cave that Teniers visited and then put in his painting?

WTH?

The cause of the imbalance of Mr. Lincoln's effort, is that Mr. Lincoln can't investigate the painting at the Hall, because it is not a painting by Teniers. It is a copy made by an artist who is NOT Teniers, of a painting done by Teniers, and investigating the history of the copy at the Hall, and the artist who made it, would result in a documentary that was not about Rennes-le-Chateau. It would instead be documentary about Shugborough Hall. Huh...

Was Mr. Lincoln planning to make a third documentary, but to have that documentary be about Shugborough Hall, instead of Rennes-le-Chateau? Is this the reason that Mr. Lincoln tried to re-
plant-part
of the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau in England?

[rubyfelixir]

CONTINUED...

Mr. Lincoln's refusal to recognize The Louvre's Tenier's paintings was re-animated 7 years later with the publication of the book 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail', authored by Henry Lincoln and two other authors, one of whom was a Freemason, published by Jonathan Cape in 1982.

The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail

QUOTE
With my director, Andrew Maxwell-Hyslop, I began to prepare a
'Chronicle' film in the spring of 1971. It was planned as a simple twenty-
minute item for a magazine programme. But as we worked de Sede began
to feed us further fragments of information. First came the full text of a
major encoded message, which spoke of the painters Poussin and Teniers.
This was fascinating. The cipher was unbelievably complex. We were told
it had been broken by experts of the French Army Cipher Department,
using computers.
END QUOTE


QUOTE
The following
decipherment has appeared in French works devoted to Rennes-le-
Chateau, and in two of our films on the subject made for the BBC.

BERGERE PAS DE TENTATION QUE POUSSIN TENIERS GARDENT LA CLEF PAX DCLXXXI

PAR LA CROIX ET CE CHEVAL DE DIEU J'ACHEVE CE DAEMON DE GARDIEN A MIDI

POMMES BLEUES
END QUOTE


QUOTE
During his stay in Paris, Sauniere also spent some time in the Louvre.
This may well be connected with the fact that, before his departure, he
purchased reproductions of three paintings. One seems to have been a
portrait, by an unidentified artist, of Pope Celestin V, who reigned briefly
at the end of the thirteenth century. One was a work by David Teniers -
although it is not clear which David Teniers, father or son . 3 The third was
perhaps the most famous tableau by Nicolas Poussin, 'Les Bergers
d'Arcadie' - 'The Shepherds of Arcadia'.

On his return to Rennes-le-Chateau, Sauniere resumed his restoration
of the village church.
END QUOTE

QUOTE
3. De Sede, L'Or de Rermes, p. 28. The painting was supposedly of 'Saint
Antoine Hermite'. De Sede himself said in conversation that the
painting was the 'Temptation of Saint Anthony', but no one knew
which one. Later our researches indicated that it was in fact 'Saint
Anthony and Saint Jerome in the Desert'.
END QUOTE

[rubyfelixir]

CONTINUED...

Are you WTHing me, Mr. Lincoln?
Are you being serious?
GERARD DE SEDE,
The AUTHOR of the book 'LE TRESOR MAUDIT',
the book that first drew Mr. Lincoln into the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau,
THAT GUY, TOLD
Mr. Lincoln
IN PERSON
that the intended painting is 'The Temptation of Saint Anthony' that is in THE LOUVRE!

In the paragraph by Mr. Lincoln that refers the reader to the foot-note by Mr. Lincoln about M. de Sede's opinion, Mr. Lincoln reports that Abbe Sauniere went to The Louvre, where he bought reproductions of three named paintings, one a work by Teniers. This information that Mr. Lincoln reports in his own book is repeated from M. de Sede's book.


QUOTE GERARD DE SEDE
Le Trésor Maudit de Rennes-le-Château
published 1969 by J'AI LU
via
The Accursed Treasure of Rennes-le-Chateau
by Gerard de Sede
TRANSLATED BY HENRY LINCOLN
published 2013 by Les Editions de L'Oeil du Sphinx
page 28
Berenger also spent some time at the Louvre museum; and after reading up on their creators, he purchased copies of three paintings, which, on his return, he will hang on the walls of his humble dwelling: The Shepherds of Arcadia, by Poussin; Saint-Antony Hermit, by David Teniers and a portrait of Pope Celestin V, which he found, who-knows-where? A singularly curious collection.
END QUOTE

There are
TWO PAINTINGS
by David Teniers the Younger
of 'The Temptation of Saint Anthony'
in The Louvre.
Both paintings are very similar to each other in terms of their composition, as both paintings depict Saint Anthony being tempted in a cave by a devil with a glass of alcohol.
One of the two paintings of a temptation is known as the LARGE temptation, because the painting is of a large size, and the other painting of the same temptation is known as the SMALL temptation, because the small painting is smaller than the painting that is larger. Just like the parchments... 

I guess that temptations come in all sizes.

Does Mr. Lincoln expect the reader to believe that he thought that Mr. de Sede thought that the painting could be a painting on a wall in a manor in England?

Here, in this third foot-note, in his first book, seven years after his second documentary, Mr. Lincoln attempts to explain his choice of a copy of a painting by Teniers, that is not by Teniers, that is hanging on a wall in an isolated hall that is in England, not in France,
with the excuse that it was
IMPOSSIBLE
TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN
TWO 

PAINTINGS?

Confused by this uhhh folie a deux, Mr. Lincoln flees France for England, fleeing into the country-side, into the centre of England, to a manor, the access to which is controlled by a national trust, to find a wall with just one painting on it. As there is just one painting by itself on the wall, the choice is easy. Mr. Lincoln chooses a painting that is
IN A MANOR IN ENGLAND
and that is a COPY made by an artist WHO IS NOT TENIERS,
of a painting that is by Teniers, an original painting that is in fact
HELD AT A DIFFERENT ENGLISH MANOR!

WTH, Mr. Lincoln. Why?

Mr. Lincoln doesn't seem to have the same problem when he has to choose between the two different versions of the other painting by the other artist. He didn't flee to England and identify the version in England as the painting intended by the Large Cipher Message.

[rubyfelixir]

CONTINUED...

Mr. Lincoln had read the book by M. de Sede before Mr. Lincoln wrote and narrated and appeared in hiss first documentary. How then, in hiss second documentary, after talking to M. de Sede in person, could Mr. Lincoln choose a painting that was a COPY of a painting by Teniers, and that was also a painting of no big and no small temptation?

Ever since the Eighties, in England and America, new books about the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau have followed Henry Lincoln's
mis-lead and mis-direction. Is it any wonder then, that the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau has remained unsolved, when Mr. Lincoln has diverted every English-speaking researcher from the path of resolution by the promotion of the WRONG painting?

Worse, when the new authors write about the mystery, and include the painting at the Hall, the photograph of the painting that they publish in their book is not a image of the painting at the Hall, which is a copy of a Teniers, but a photograph of the original painting by Teniers that the copy was made from, a painting that is not at the Hall!

WTH is happening here?

Why do new authors who publish books after Henry Lincoln's second documentary and hiss first book, think that they too have to lie to their readers about what painting is at the Hall, by the use of an image of the wrong painting? 

Authors of large websites that claim to research Rennes-le-Chateau have continued this lie about which painting is at the Hall.
And worse, the spokes-man for the MARANATHA Project wrote an on-line article titled
'The Mink Tome Project'
that magnified the lie of which painting is at the Hall.
The lie by the spokes-man in hiss article is especially bad because the project's Research Group relied on this lie as evidence to support the Masonic project's conclusions.

QUOTE the author of
'The Time Monk Project' article
published 8 May 2011
found at
httpcolonslashslashwebdotarchivedotorgslashwebslash20110508005426slash
httpcolonslashslashwwwdotandrewgoughdotcodotukslash
guestunderbartimemonkdothtml

Teniers’ Painting

The painting by Teniers referred to in the Priory of Sion document is that of St Anthony and St Paul in the Desert, which was at one time reported to have been at Shugbourgh Hall. [...]
END QUOTE

The author of the article then inserts an image of the original painting that was done by Teniers that is at a different manor, instead of the copy at the Hall.
The author then uses the image of the painting from a different manor
13 more times to show the stages of the construction of a geometric confection in that painting, a construction the author calls the Geometric Key, described as
QUOTE
a discovery beyond REASONABLE doubt
END QUOTE
made by the Research Group,
of 'perfect geometry'...
in the
WRONG painting.

ALL of the WTHs!

[Jenny]

So to clarify....which is the correct painting?

[rubyfelixir]

BUT I DIGRESS...

My colleague, the wyvern-herder BOWNARROW, also recognized that Mr. Lincoln had mis-led viewers and readers, as BOWNARROW chose a different painting of Saint Anthony to be the second painting from that of the painting that Mr. Lincoln chose.

And yet, BOWNARROW still chose a painting that fit the peculiar preferences of Mr. Lincoln's anglo-phile inversion, as BOWNARROW chose a painting that was not done by Teniers, and that is also a painting that is not of a temptation, as there is no thing to tempt the saint to be found in the painting that BOWNARROW chose. But at least BOWNARROW chose a painting that is in France, instead of England, and chose a painting that is at a location where Abbe Sauniere could of seen it.

[Bownarrow]

Apr 21, 2024 4:18:35 GMT -5 rubyfelixir said:

BUT I DIGRESS...

My colleague, the wyvern-herder BOWNARROW, also recognized that Mr. Lincoln had mis-led viewers and readers, as BOWNARROW chose a different painting of Saint Anthony to be the second painting from that of the painting that Mr. Lincoln chose.

And yet, BOWNARROW still chose a painting that fit the peculiar preferences of Mr. Lincoln's anglo-phile inversion, as BOWNARROW chose a painting that was not done by Teniers, and that is also a painting that is not of a temptation, as there is no thing to tempt the saint to be found in the painting that BOWNARROW chose. But at least BOWNARROW chose a painting that is in France, instead of England, and chose a painting that is at a location where Abbe Sauniere could of seen it.

www.connectotel.com/rennes/marceile.html

The nave contains some fairly remarkable paintings. One of those above all, The Temptation of Saint Anthony, is justly considered as a work of great merit.

Nov 1890

Who the original artist was of the painting, is not clear. To my eye it does look like it is by Teniers, or by a follower of Teniers.It is clearly in his style. It is therefore allowable to call it a Teniers until a firm identification of it’s creator is made. As far as I am aware that is still to be established.

If if you know otherwise Ruby I please let me know.

[rubyfelixir]

The
painting chosen by BOWNARROW is not the same
painting as the
painting publicly stated to be the
painting by the spokes-man for the MARANATHA Project in 'The Mink Tome Project' article, an article about a
painting or two. And how does BOWNARROW square the geometry that is presented in that article as being present in a
painting or two in that article, with the
painting that BOWNARROW chose, a

painting in which the geometry if it had any has been... covered up? Perhaps it exposed too much?

But I digress...

[Bownarrow]

Apr 22, 2024 4:21:05 GMT -5 rubyfelixir said:

The
painting chosen by BOWNARROW is not the same
painting as the
painting publicly stated to be the
painting by the spokes-man for the MARANATHA Project in 'The Mink Tome Project' article, an article about a
painting or two. And how does BOWNARROW square the geometry that is presented in that article as being present in a
painting or two in that article, with the
painting that BOWNARROW chose, a

painting in which the geometry if it had any has been... covered up? Perhaps it exposed too much?

But I digress...

From what I have seen, Duncan Burden knows as good as nothing about how to solve the Maranatha puzzle. Why do you think that geometry is relevant to the puzzle? As far as I am concerned it has no relevance at all.Just because Duncan has said it is relevant, and Henry Lincoln has said it relevant, does not make it relevant.Even Henry Lincoln told people not believe anything he had written ( or something like it).

[Jenny]

This whole conversation or comments by Ruby bring to mind the following quote! Such seems to me any discussion on Rennes le Chateau......


The Accursed Treasure of Rennes le Chateau (translated by Bill Kersey, DEK Publishing, 2001)

“For such a man the only way out would be to speak while taking care not to be understood, or to be understood while ensuring that certain aspects are never overtly mentioned.”


Ruby is an expert...... gotta love it.....


But to clarify - which painting is the correct one?

I think we agree on Poussin's painting - but which of Teniers? And now it is the one with Temptation? Please explain the 'no temptation' then.....

[Bownarrow]

Apr 22, 2024 7:43:09 GMT -5 Jenny said:

This whole conversation or comments by Ruby bring to mind the following quote! Such seems to me any discussion on Rennes le Chateau......


The Accursed Treasure of Rennes le Chateau (translated by Bill Kersey, DEK Publishing, 2001)

“For such a man the only way out would be to speak while taking care not to be understood, or to be understood while ensuring that certain aspects are never overtly mentioned.”


Ruby is an expert...... gotta love it.....


But to clarify - which painting is the correct one?

I think we agree on Poussin's painting - but which of Teniers? And now it is the one with Temptation? Please explain the 'no temptation' then.....

It must be remembered that the original of the hidden message in the large parchment was in French, not English.

This was the explanation I gave on the Key thread,Jenny.

There is however another possible meaning of ‘ Pas de tentation’(No temptation). If it is taken to mean ‘ No temptation’ this has always struck me as a very vague statement. It can be interpreted in so many different ways. My discomfort with this meaning has lead me to look at the phrase - "pas de tentation" - from a different angle.

Pas -> sap( anagram. ) -> succus(L.) -> vigour(L.) ->vigor(L.) -> Virgo -> a girl(L.)
de -> of
Tentation-> temptation

Using the above, ‘ pas de tentation’ can be understood as ‘ temptation of a girl’.

In other words ' no Temptation' IS a temptation-A Temptation of St.Anthony with St.Anthony being tempted by a girl.

[rubyfelixir]

PARAPHRASE BOWNARROW
There is however another possible meaning of 'PAS DE TENTATION'. [...]
Using the above, the PAS of 'PAS DE TENTATION' can be understood to mean VIRGO, producing the phrase 'VIRGO DE TENTATION', 'a seduction by a young woman'.
In other words, the words 'PAS DE TENTATION', 'no temptation', are not referring to NO temptation, but are instead referring to a temptation, a Temptation of St. Anthony where a woman, the VIRGO, attempts to seduce St. Anthony.
END PARACHUTE

First of all, this would appear to be the wrong Virgin for your theory, so perhaps this is the wrong painting for your theory.
Second, of the geometry in the article, you stated

QUOTE
Just because Duncan has said it is relevant, and Henry Lincoln has said it relevant, does not make it relevant! Oh... What the Hell am I doing here, then?
END QUOTE

A bit weird, that bit at the end.

[Bownarrow]

Apr 22, 2024 10:09:36 GMT -5 rubyfelixir said:

PARAPHRASE BOWNARROW
There is however another possible meaning of 'PAS DE TENTATION'. [...]
Using the above, the PAS of 'PAS DE TENTATION' can be understood to mean VIRGO, producing the phrase 'VIRGO DE TENTATION', 'a seduction by a young woman'.
In other words, the words 'PAS DE TENTATION', 'no temptation', are not referring to NO temptation, but are instead referring to a temptation, a Temptation of St. Anthony where a woman, the VIRGO, attempts to seduce St. Anthony.
END PARACHUTE

First of all, this would appear to be the wrong Virgin for your theory, so perhaps this is the wrong painting for your theory.
Second, of the geometry in the article, you stated

QUOTE
Just because Duncan has said it is relevant, and Henry Lincoln has said it relevant, does not make it relevant! Oh... What the Hell am I doing here, then?
END QUOTE  

A bit weird, that bit at the end.

www.reinedumidi.com/ndm/tentations%205.htm

“ ...le peíntre, s’inspirant de la tradition a sit represente le saint( Antoine) tente par Satan sous les formes adorables de la femme...”

”...il barbouilla la deliceuse fille d’Eve..”

Ruby,

I am at a loss to understand how you come to the conclusion that it is the ‘ wrong virgin’. The painting depicted a girl/ woman according to the 1891 article from the short-lived newspaper Panurge, from which the above extracts are drawn. That is all that needs to be known. The fact she was intended as an allegorical representation of Satan is irrelevant.It does not somehow change the fact that what was depicted was a girl/ woman.

What is more the article refers to the girl/ woman as a ‘daughter of Eve’. This is a title of the Virgin Mary - the Key! The description of the painting in the Panurge article then, rather than refuting the idea it is the correct Teniers, supports it, since the painting holds the Key- The Virgin Mary.

Incidentally, both ‘ Virgo’ and ‘Vigor’ were titles of The Virgin Mary as well. ( See Polyanthea Mariana, by Hippolytus Marrachi , 1628, p763, 787.

In response to your question - What the hell am I doing here, then? - my answer would simply be - thinking for yourself; not relying on others to do your thinking for you. Even Duncan specifically said, to question everything you read /hear.

www.rennes-le-chateau-archive.com/ndm_autres_amenagements.php

See photo 11. 

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nicolas_Poussin_and_Daniel_Seghers_-_Pietà_-_Musée_Thomas-Henry.jpg

www.vads.ac.uk/digital/collection/NIRP/id/29960/ 

It would be interesting to know whether the painting with the depiction of the Virgin Mary in the centre surrounded by a garland of flowers in Notre Dame de Marceille, was in fact a collaboration between Daniel Seghers and Nicolas Poussin. In the photograph it is certainly similar to other paintings produced as a collaboration between the two artists. If it was in fact proven to be a collaboration between the two artists, that would mean that there was both a Poussin and a Teniers on display in the church, both holding the Key- The Virgin Mary!

The head and face of the Virgin Mary in the Notre Dame de Marceille painting is similar to that of The Virgin Mary in the Pieta of Poussin and Seghers in the Musée-Thomas-Henry In Cherbourg.Both seem to be painted in the same loose manner of Poussin’s early period. It is also similar to The Virgin and Child by the two artists in the Brighton and Hove museums in the UK.

I have no doubts whatsoever the Notre Dame De Marceille 'Temptation of St.Anthony' is the correct 'Teniers'.