III · THE WORK · ART HISTORY
Sunset at Montmajour
▶ Listen · narrated
For more than a hundred years the painting hung in a Norwegian collection under a cloud of doubt. In 2013 it became the first full-sized van Gogh newly confirmed since 1928.
At a glance
- Artist
- Vincent van Gogh
- Date
- 4 July 1888
- Medium
- Oil paint on canvas
- Dimensions
- 93.3 × 73.3 cm (2 ft 5 in)
- Genre
- Landscape painting
Look closer
The abbey on the skyline
The ruins of Montmajour Abbey sit low on the far ridge, small enough that the eye may miss them at first. They are not a romantic centrepiece but a quiet landmark: broken walls and a mass of stone against the late light, anchoring the distance without dominating it. Van Gogh places them where the land meets the sky, so that the ruin reads as part of the horizon rather than a separate subject.
Garrigue, not pasture
The ground is scrub — the dry Mediterranean cover known as garrigue — rather than cultivated fields. Low bushes, rock and uneven growth fill the middle distance and climb toward the viewer. There is no neat path or cleared foreground. The vegetation is patchy and resistant, the kind of country that holds heat after sunset and does not invite easy walking.
A sky that does the work
Because the landforms stay relatively low and quiet, the upper half of the canvas carries much of the drama. The sunset is not a thin strip of colour at the edge; it occupies the air above the ridge and presses down on the scrub. The painting’s title is not decorative. The hour is the subject as much as the place.
The story
Sunset at Montmajour was painted on 4 July 1888, while Vincent van Gogh was living at Arles in the south of France. It is an oil painting on canvas, ninety-three point three centimetres high by seventy-three point three centimetres wide, and it belongs to the genre of landscape. What it shows is the country around the ruined abbey of Montmajour: a stretch of garrigue — the low, hardy scrub of the Provençal hills — with the abbey ruins set back against the sky at the close of day.
The composition is straightforward and unhurried. There is no figure to organise the scene, no road drawing the eye in a single line. The land rises in irregular masses of bush and rock; the abbey remains a distant silhouette; the light of sunset occupies the upper air. The painting asks the viewer to stay with a particular kind of ground at a particular hour, rather than to decode a narrative or a symbol.
Its later history is almost as important to how it is now known as the day it was made. For more than a hundred years the work sat in the private collection of a Norwegian industrialist, widely assumed to be inauthentic. Its status was questioned more than once. Only in 2013 was it confirmed as a genuine painting by van Gogh — the first full-sized work by him to be newly authenticated since 1928. After that confirmation it was sold to a private owner. Between 24 September 2013 and 12 January 2014 it was shown temporarily at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, the one public period in a long life spent largely out of sight.
The delay matters because it shaped what could be said about the picture. While it was thought false, it could not be placed in the Arles sequence or compared, without embarrassment, to the landscapes van Gogh was making in the same months. Once accepted, it filled a gap that scholars had not been able to fill with a full-sized canvas for the better part of a century. The subject itself — Montmajour at sunset, seen from the scrub — is simple. The recovery of the object is what made the simplicity available again.
Why it mattered then
In July 1888 van Gogh was working at Arles and turning repeatedly to the country immediately around him. Montmajour, with its ruined abbey above the flat and scrubby ground, was part of that local geography. A landscape painted on a single dated day records not a touristic vista but a working choice: this ground, this hour, this scale of canvas. Sunset subjects also tested how far colour and tone could carry a scene when the forms of the land itself stayed modest. The painting belongs to a moment when van Gogh was building a body of Provençal landscapes in oil, and when the abbey and its surrounding garrigue were available motifs rather than distant legends.
Why it matters now
The work still matters less as a rediscovered trophy than as a reminder of how fragile a painting’s public life can be. For a century it existed physically but not, in any secure sense, as a van Gogh. Viewers who care about looking closely at nineteenth-century landscape now have one more full-sized Arles canvas to set beside the better-known ones — a quiet composition of scrub, ruin and late light — but they also have a cautionary case. Authentication is not a single event sealed at the easel; it is a long argument that can keep a picture in the shadows until evidence and consensus catch up. The temporary display at the Van Gogh Museum in 2013–14 made that argument briefly visible to a wide public.
The surprising detail
The painting’s modern fame rests on an absence as much as a presence. It is the first full-sized van Gogh to have been newly confirmed since 1928. That gap of eighty-five years means that for most of the twentieth century the known corpus of large van Gogh oils was treated as essentially closed. A canvas that had hung in Norway, dismissed as fake, reopened a category many had stopped expecting to reopen.
What is disputed
The painting’s authenticity was questioned several times before the 2013 confirmation; earlier dismissals are part of its documented history, not a minor footnote. Ownership after the Norwegian collection is private, and public access has been limited to the temporary Van Gogh Museum display of 2013–14. Precise details of the scientific and art-historical tests used in 2013 are not among the facts supplied here and should not be invented.
Remember this
A dated Arles landscape of garrigue and abbey ruins, painted in 1888, misjudged for a century, and only secured as van Gogh’s in 2013.
Test yourself
Why does the long period in which Sunset at Montmajour was thought to be fake change how we should describe the painting’s place in van Gogh’s work, even after authentication?
Because a work excluded from the accepted corpus cannot shape the story told about an artist’s choices in a given year. While it was dismissed, the Montmajour landscape could not be used to thicken the account of what van Gogh painted at Arles in July 1888. Authentication in 2013 did not merely add an object to a list; it restored a full-sized canvas to a sequence that had been discussed for decades without it. The painting’s meaning now includes both what it shows and the fact that it was missing from that discussion for so long.
Go deeper
Image: Vincent van Gogh, Public domain. Licence: Public domain. Source.