A village feud over who owns extant tree roots behind Vincent van Gogh last painting has been settled after a local mayor lost a court bid to take the land from a couple’s garden.
Just hours before his death in July 1890, Van Gogh painted a scene of tangled tree roots in vivid colours – putting his internal struggle on full display.
In 2020, the tree roots he painted were identified in the back garden of 48 Rue Daubigny, in the small riverside village of Auvers-sur-Oise, where the artist spent his final days.
Since its discovery, the site has been subject of a bitter row between the owners of the land, Jean-François and Hélène Serlinger, and Auvers’ mayor, Isabelle Mézières.
The local authorities tried to take the site under public ownership in 2020, claiming it was part of the public highway.
However, in 2023 a local court ruled against the mayor, and now the matter appears to be settled for once and for all after the Versailles appeal court backed up the previous ruling.
“We are very happy that this is now over,” Ms Serlinger, 68, told The Independent. “The mayor tried to grab the bottom part of the sire by saying it was part of the road, which is terrible.
“But the appeal is very clear, which is great, and now we can use our maximum energy to work on the site and welcome more people from around the world.”
The couple’s love for Van Gogh inspired them to move to the quaint village in 1996.
They acquired the extra land at the bottom of their garden in 2013, but had no idea the roots that lay there were of such significance at the time.
Since the Van Gogh Institute identified the site as the place the Dutch master painted his final masterpiece in 2020, the couple have welcomed visitors from around the globe – including Van Gogh’s family.
Enthusiasts can take a 30-minute tour of their garden for €8 when they open for the season on April 12.
Since the appeal judgement was handed down, Ms Mézières has taken to social media to criticise the couple.
“The roots belong to the people of Auvers!” she wrote, adding that she would be continuing legal action.
