Van Gogh's The Starry Night: What if an old theory was wrong?

For decades, the prevailing theory was that the stars in the upper part of The Starry Night represented a region of the constellation Aries. In the 1980s, Albert Boime, an art historian at the University of California, Los Angeles, began examining the painting as a possible astronomical document. Working with astronomer Charles Whitney, he investigated what the sky would have looked like over Saint-Rémy-de-Provence, where Van Gogh was staying at the time.

Their reconstruction suggested that several stars in Aries would have been visible near Venus in the early morning sky on June 19, 1889. Van Gogh had also written about the dawn sky and its stars in a letter dated June 18 that year. Drawing on these clues, Boime argued that the star pattern in the painting was linked to Aries. The theory offered a compelling connection between Van Gogh’s artistic vision and the celestial landscape he observed.

Now, however, a new study is challenging that interpretation.

The case for the Hyades

Led by Elia Jeong-Hyun Kim, a researcher at Kyung Hee University in South Korea, the team behind the new study has proposed a different explanation. Their paper, titled The Actual Sky of Van Gogh's Starry Night: A Multidisciplinary Reconstruction, argues that the five prominent stars at the centre of the painting correspond more closely to the Hyades cluster in Taurus than to Aries.

To test this, the researchers used a statistical technique known as Procrustes shape analysis. The method compares the relative positions and angles of points in two configurations while accounting for differences in scale, orientation and rotation. In this case, it allowed the team to compare the arrangement of stars in Van Gogh’s painting with the actual patterns found in the night sky.

The result was striking. The five stars form a distinctive V-shaped pattern, one that the researchers found closely resembles the structure of the Hyades.

But the team did not stop at comparing star patterns. They also examined historical weather and temperature records from Saint-Rémy to reconstruct the conditions under which the sky would have appeared to Van Gogh.

Their findings point to the early hours of July 22, 1889. On that morning, a slender waning crescent Moon, Venus and the Hyades cluster would have appeared close together in the eastern sky. The arrangement, they argue, offers a more convincing explanation for the celestial features in the painting than the earlier theory.

The Moon provides an important clue. On June 19, it would have appeared as a nearly full gibbous Moon. By July 22, it was a narrow crescent. The latter fits the researchers’ reconstruction of the scene more closely.

Did Van Gogh know about the Hyades?

This is where the story becomes particularly intriguing. If the painting depicts the Hyades, how did Van Gogh know what the cluster looked like?

The researchers are not suggesting that he necessarily knew its scientific name or had studied advanced astronomy. Their argument is simpler. On the morning of July 22, 1889, Van Gogh could have seen the arrangement for himself from the window of the asylum at Saint-Rémy, where he was receiving treatment.

Venus, the crescent Moon and the V-shaped cluster would have been visible to the naked eye. He did not need to identify the stars scientifically to notice their positions or recognise the pattern they formed.

There is, however, an important distinction between observing the sky and reproducing it faithfully. Van Gogh was not attempting to create a photographic record of the heavens. He transformed what he saw through colour, movement and his unmistakable brushwork. The swirling forms and heightened intensity of The Starry Night reflect an artistic imagination that reshaped the visible world rather than simply copying it.

The possibility that a real celestial arrangement lies behind the painting does not diminish its imaginative power. If anything, it adds another layer to the mystery. A fleeting view of the dawn sky may have become the starting point for a work that continues to fascinate viewers more than a century later.

A compelling theory, but not the final word

For all its promise, the new research should not be treated as a definitive solution to the mystery. Some astronomers and researchers remain unconvinced by aspects of the reconstruction.

Physicist José Luis Aragón, who was not involved in the study, described the proposal as an interesting hypothesis but raised concerns about the Moon’s appearance in the painting. Its shape and phase, he suggested, present a significant discrepancy that needs to be addressed.

Don Olson, a researcher known for investigating astronomical references in art and literature, has also questioned the new interpretation. He argues that the relative positions of Venus and the Hyades in the painting do not entirely match the calculated arrangement. For Olson, Van Gogh’s letter of June 18 remains an important piece of evidence in favour of the earlier theory.

These objections leave room for debate. Reconstructing a historical sky is a complex exercise, particularly when the evidence comes from a painting in which observation and artistic interpretation are inseparable. Even a close match between celestial patterns cannot, by itself, establish exactly what an artist intended to depict.

Still, the study offers a fresh way of looking at The Starry Night. Rather than seeing the painting as a product of imagination alone, it invites us to consider how closely Van Gogh may have observed the world around him before transforming it on canvas.

Perhaps the mystery lies precisely there: in the meeting of a real sky and an extraordinary artistic vision. Whether the stars belong to Aries or the Hyades, The Starry Night reminds us that careful observation and boundless imagination need not be opposites. Sometimes, one gives rise to the other.