5. These three studies were probably Still life with onions and Annuaire de la santé (F 604 / JH 1656

), Self-portrait with bandaged ear (F 527 / JH 1657

) and Self-portrait with bandaged ear and pipe (F 529 / JH 1658

). F 604 probably contains a depiction of the envelope in which Theo’s letter had arrived on 23 December (l. 23). His handwriting is recognizable, and the number ‘67’ in the postmark refers to place des Abbesses (office 67), the address of the post office where the letter was franked. There are also two postage stamps, one yellowish green, the other blue. They are probably one of 15 centimes, which was the normal rate for a letter, and one of 25 centimes, which was the extra postage for a registered letter. In the top left corner of the envelope there is a capital letter in a rectangle, probably R for Recommandée (Registered), so it is likely that this was the envelope containing Theo’s letter and the 100 franc note that Vincent received on 23 December.

6. Félix Rey (F 500 / JH 1659

a. Read: ‘qui passera’.

7. This café owner was undoubtedly Joseph Ginoux.

b. Read: ‘question’.

8. Theo had sent Roulin a postal order for 30 francs to pay the rent for December (21.50 francs). Roulin confirmed receipt of the payment in his letter to Theo of 7 January 1889 (FR b1069).

9. Gauguin had telegraphed Theo that he should come to Arles, because Vincent had been admitted to hospital. In letter 730 Vincent, who had thought it unnecessary for Theo to come, reproached Gauguin for doing it.

10. In a letter written to Van Gogh in June 1888, Gauguin had outlined his plan to start dealing in Impressionist paintings; Van Gogh dismissed his scheme as a ‘fata Morgana’. See letter 623.

11. In Avant et après Gauguin quoted from a letter (no longer extant) which Van Gogh had written to him ‘well after the catastrophe’ (bien longtemps après la catastrophe), probably from Saint-Rémy: ‘How lucky you are to be in Paris. It’s still there that the leading medical men live, and you should certainly consult a specialist to cure you of insanity. Aren’t we all that?’ (Que vous êtes heureux d’être à Paris. C’est encore là où se trouvent les sommités, et certainement vous devriez consulter un spécialiste pour vous guérir de la folie. Ne le sommes-nous pas tous?) See Gauguin 1923, p. 13.

12. This reveals that Gauguin had asked in the missing part of letter 734 for the painting Sunflowers in a vase (F 454 / JH 1562

), the ‘sunflowers on a yellow background’ which is also mentioned in letter 739. It had been hanging – together with its pendant, Sunflowers in a vase (F 456 / JH 1561

) – in Gauguin’s room in Arles (letter 743). Van Gogh did not want to trade F 454 for the studies Gauguin had left behind, and suggested making a repetition as a compromise (letter 739). He had intended the first two versions of the sunflowers for Theo (letter 741). A short while later he made repetitions of both works: Sunflowers in a vase (F 455 / JH 1668

) and Sunflowers in a vase (F 458 / JH 1667

) for the purpose of exchanging them with Gauguin (letters 743 and 745).

He had meanwhile decided that the four versions of sunflowers would serve as the wings of two triptychs, each with a Berceuse in the middle. This is why he wanted to exchange a Berceuse with Gauguin (see letter 748), with the idea that Gauguin would then have an entire triptych. Later he wrote to Theo that Gauguin was allowed to have the Berceuse, but should offer work in exchange for the sunflowers (see letter 776). Gauguin did in fact receive a Berceuse, but apparently not the sunflowers. See Van Tilborgh and Hendriks 2001, pp. 24-25. On the basis of their provenance, it can be stated that none of the versions of the sunflowers was ever in the possession of Gauguin. See Dorn 1999, pp. 60-61.

At the end of April or beginning of May 1889, Van Gogh sent Theo the studies Gauguin had left behind (see letter 765).

13. In Paris Van Gogh had traded his Sunflowers gone to seed (F 375 / JH 1329

) and Sunflowers gone to seed (F 376 / JH 1331

) for Gauguin’s On the shore of the lake, Martinique ; see letter 576, n. 2. At the end of September 1888, Van Gogh had received Gauguin’s Self-portrait with portrait of Bernard, ‘Les misérables’ and had sent him in return his Self-portrait (F 476 / JH 1581

). See letter 697.

14. In Marseille Roulin took up the post of ‘courrier-convoyeur’ (an official in the postal carriage in the train, in charge of loading and unloading the postbags at each station and sorting the post during the journey). Van Gogh made a note of Roulin’s duties and his address in Marseille (see letter 742, Additional details). Roulin’s wife was staying with their children at her mother’s in Lambesc until they could move to Marseille in October 1889 (see letter 814).

On 24 January 1889 Theo wrote to his sisters Elisabeth and Willemien: ‘Fortunately I have good news from Vincent and his letters are clearer than they have ever been. Just imagine, Roulin has just been transferred. That is a great loss for him. The house physician at the hospital is now the one who can be of the most use to him’ (FR b919).

15. This question also arose in letter 735. On 30 December 1888 Félix Rey had written to Theo: In a few months, when I submit my doctoral thesis in Paris, I too should be happy if somebody were able to take an interest in me at a difficult moment. (Dans quelques mois, lorsque j’irai passer ma thèse de doctorat à Paris; je serais heureux moi aussi, que quelqu’un pût s’interesser à moi dans le malheur) (FR b1056; see Documentation, 30 December 1888). The letter Theo wrote to Rey, to which Vincent refers, was no doubt a reaction to this. It is not known if Van Gogh gave Rivet a painting.

16. This undertaker by Meijer de Haan is not known. In October 1888 Theo had sent two photographs of drawings by De Haan; see letter 708, n. 3.

17. Gauguin’s chair (F 499 / JH 1636

18. Van Gogh’s chair (F 498 / JH 1635

19. Gauguin later wrote about money matters in Avant et après: ‘From the first month I saw our shared finances take on the same appearance of disorder. What was to be done? The situation was delicate, since the kitty was modestly filled by his brother who works for the firm of Goupil; in my case, in combination with exchanges of paintings. Speak out: it had to be done, and to clash with a very sensitive nature. It was therefore only with great care and many gentle approaches somewhat at odds with my nature that I broached the question. I must confess, I succeeded much more easily than I had imagined. In a box, so much for nocturnal excursions of a hygienic sort, so much for tobacco, and also so much for unexpected expenses, including the rent. On top of all that a piece of paper and a pencil to write honestly what each of us took out of this box. In another box, what was left of the total, divided into four parts for the cost of food each week.’ (Dès le premier mois je vis nos finances en commun prendre les mêmes allures de désordre. Comment faire? la situation était délicate, la caisse étant remplie modestement par son frère employé dans la maison Goupil; pour ma part en combinaison d’échange en tableaux. Parler: il le fallait et se heurter contre une susceptibilité très grande. Ce n’est donc qu’avec beaucoup de précautions et bien des manières câlines peu compatibles avec mon caractère que j’abordai la question. Il faut l’avouer, je réussis beaucoup plus facilement que je ne l’avais supposé. Dans une boîte, tant pour promenades nocturnes et hygiéniques, tant pour le tabac, tant aussi pour dépenses impromptu y compris le loyer. Sur tout cela un morceau de papier et un crayon pour inscrire honnêtement ce que chacun prenait dans cette caisse. Dans une autre boîte le restant de la somme divisée en quatre parties pour la dépense de nourriture chaque semaine.) See Gauguin 1923, pp. 16-17.

20. Regarding the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, see letter 625, n. 10.

21. For Daudet’s Tartarin de Tarascon and Tartarin sur les Alpes, see letter 583, n. 9. The friend of Tartarin referred to here is Bompard. This personage from Numa Roumestan – a book Van Gogh mentions later in the letter – appears again in Daudet’s Tartarin sur les Alpes. Bompard is a dreamer and a liar (a condition caused by the devastatingly hot sun of the south) and surpasses all his fellow Tarasconians in this respect.

Bompard’s ‘imaginary Switzerland’ is mentioned in ‘Confidences sous un tunnel’ (Secrets in a tunnel; chapter 5) in Tartarin sur les Alpes. See Daudet 1986-1994, vol. 3, pp. 593-596. Van Gogh’s mention of ‘the fall’ actually refers to ‘La catastrophe’ (The catastrophe; chapter 13). Bompard and Tartarin, tied together for a hike in the mountains, come to an impasse. They both cut themselves free, each assuming that this has caused the death of the other. Later the braggart Bompard claims that he tried to save Tartarin. In addition to telling this lie, he has broken the vow the friends had made to help each other in need, no matter what. The ‘rope’ to which Van Gogh refers – which symbolizes broken promises – is found at the end of the chapter (pp. 667-675); marking this passage is an illustration of a knotted rope with two severed ends. See, for instance, ed. Paris 1886, p. 348. Regarding Van Gogh’s comparison of Gauguin with Bompard, see also Sund 1992, p. 216.

22. The Tarascon stagecoach (F 478a / JH 1605

). ‘Tartarin the lion-hunter’ refers to Daudet’s Tartarin de Tarascon; for the passage on the diligence, see letter 703, n. 1.

23. After ‘tant que’ (as regards) Van Gogh crossed out first ‘son voyage’ (his journey) and then ‘sa desertion’ (his desertion).

24. In 1799 Napoleon returned to Paris, having started his ‘Egyptian expedition’ the previous year against the British dominion of India. Despite his military successes he was forced to break off the undertaking, because France had suffered a serious defeat in Europe against the Second Coalition. In 1812, when his army was decimated during its march to Russia, and again in 1815, when his army lost the Battle of Waterloo, Napoleon abandoned his men and returned to Paris. See J.M. Thompson, Napoleon Bonaparte. Oxford 1988, pp. 338-339, 381.