Rules:
Somewhat in parallel, I read a fairly compelling theory last year that his 'frenemy' Van Gogh likely did not actually shoot himself, but was likely done in by a reckless young man that was a known presence in the area, and had threatened others before at gunpoint IIRC.
Still, kind of surprising that one doesn't seem to have gotten much traction until... semi-recently, I guess.
That would be an interesting revision for the (art) history books if it was actually manslaughter/murder rather than suicide, I found this article with a quick search Vanity Fair
No one knew where he would have gotten a gun; no one admitted to finding the gun afterward, or any of the other items he had taken with him (canvas, easel, paints, etc.). His deathbed doctors, an obstetrician and a homeopathist, could make no sense of his wounds.
I'm finding these reexaminations, not just of art and artists, but also black history/colonialism, sexual politics etc really interesting
Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith offered a far more plausible scenario—that Van Gogh was killed—only to find themselves under attack
Geez, that's become so modern and depressing.
Monied interests, and all that, I don't know...