To Theo van Gogh. London, Friday, 20 February 1874.

Probably E.J.T. Thoré (under the pseudonym W. Bürger), Musées de la Hollande, i ; see letter 15, n. 11.

The book by J.M. van Vloten that Theo had mentioned was presumably Nederlands schilderkunst van de 14e tot de 18e eeuw. Voor het Nederlandsche volk geschetst. Met ruim 50 houtsneden en een portret van Rembrandt, op staal geëtst door J.W. Kaiser. Amsterdam 1874. The book’s publication was announced in 1873, so it possibly appeared early in 1874.

J.M. van Vloten, Aesthetica of schoonheidskunde, in losse hoofdtrekken, naar uit- en in-heemsche bronnen voor Nederlanders geschetst . Deventer 1865; or the second edition of the same: Aesthetika of leer van den kunstsmaak, naar uit- en inheemsche bronnen voor Nederlanders bewerkt . Second, greatly expanded and improved edition. 2 vols. Deventer 1871. This tome, a general theoretical treatment of the principles of art, is written in a somewhat academic style.

Theo visited Uncle Cor in Amsterdam on 8 February 1874 (FR b2687).

Vincent and Theo’s cousin Anna Cornelia Carbentus, who lived in The Hague.

The precise meaning of ‘de peen hanniken’ or ‘peenhanniken’ is unclear. Neither the WNT nor dialect dictionaries contain this expression. In North Brabant dialect the word ‘pee’ is still used as a synonym of ‘biet’ (beet) or ‘wortel’ (carrot). The plural ‘peeën’ is pronounced the same as ‘peen’. In all likelihood ‘hanniken’ is a dialect variant of ‘hakken’ (to hack or to hoe). Sugar beets or mangel-wurzel (mangold) plants grow so close together that they have to be thinned out to prevent crowding. The literal meaning of ‘de peen hakken’ or ‘hanniken’ could therefore be ‘to thin out a row of beets’. In the figurative sense it could mean ‘to make room, or to give oneself the space, to blossom better’, but because the context is unclear, the meaning of this expression remains a mystery.

In earlier editions of the letters edited by Jo van Gogh-Bonger and the engineer V.W. van Gogh, these initials were replaced by the name ‘Bertha Hanebeek’. A copy made by Jo van Gogh-Bonger follows the original ‘B.H.’, with the note ‘a young, pretty cousin who died at an early age’ (FR b4535). We could find no trace of a cousin by that name. It is more likely that Van Gogh was referring to Gijsbertha (Bertha) Hamming, an old friend of the Van Gogh children from Zundert, who occurs a number of times in the family correspondence. In the eyes of Mr van Gogh, her behaviour was certainly not beyond reproach, and he advised his children not to have too much to do with her. See, for example, FR b2639 and Kools 1990, pp. 39-41.

The Hague industrialist Edward Levien Jacobson, art collector and Maecenas, maintained contacts with Goupil’s Hague branch. Some of his extensive collection was sold at auction in 1875 and 1894. See Stolwijk 1998, p. 343 and Henri Reuchlin, ‘Edward Levien Jacobson (1802-1875), profiel van een verzamelaar en industrieel pionier rond het midden van de negentiende eeuw’, Rotterdams jaarboekje (1976), pp. 168-181.

On 24 February 1874 Anna, in Leeuwarden, wrote a letter to Theo in which she told of a letter she had received from Vincent, from which she had inferred that he seemed ‘always in good-spirits’, writing further in English: ‘I got too a very kind letter from Eugénie, she seems to be a natural and admiable [sic] girl. Vincent wrote me that she was engaged; with a good natured youth, who would know to appreciate her. I am very curious to know more about him and Annet, we two are just old people who try to know all about persons who are in love. But I am very glad for Vincent that he has found such a kind family to live, you know now yourself, how agreable [sic] it is. He seems to be always in good-spirits. In the last letter he writes me: “I fear that after all the sunshine I enjoy from there could be very soon rain – but I will only enjoy as long as possible the sunshine, and have my umbrella in the neighbourhood for the rain that could come”’ (FR b2689).

Willem Marinus Valkis.

Employees of Goupil in The Hague. The first could be the one to whom Mr and Mrs van Gogh refer in their letters as ‘Jan the assistant’; cf. ‘How adversely the party last Sunday of Jan the assistant was affected by the weather ... I hope that Mr Tersteeg will have been satisfied with it. It is certainly very nice indeed to give such evidence that one holds the assistants in esteem’ (FR b2551, Mr van Gogh in a letter to Theo, 16 August 1877).

The second, Piet, could be the one who was a foreman and frame-maker at Goupil’s during Van Gogh’s second stay in The Hague at the beginning of the 1880s, namely P.W. Gisolf. Cf. Visser 1973, p. 1.