It is true that Naifeh & Smith, in their biographic work, refute the suicide as being a plausible argument. However, after reading a couple synopsis about their work versus a (more) plausible story, some discrepancies claim pertinence.
It is consensual that brother René was the diabolic type (in opposition to friendly Gaston). He had a taste for harassing the weak ones, and he was a leader of a local trouble making gang. Besides his current occupations, like squirrel hunting and target shooting, he enjoyed to 'gift' Van Gogh, despite also showing some admiration proximity with the artist, with salt in his coffee, snakes in his paint box and pepper in his brushes. He also used (quote) to run up and down wearing a complete cowboy outfit,
including a .38 caliber, which he got through the Inn owner, Gustave Ravoux.. Here to consider that, to whom Ravoux actually sold, or loan, or which gun, remains somehow obscure. Thinking that the (one) has belonged or was in possession of Van Gogh seems rather unlikely ... but possible, based for one, in one version that René loan it to him to scare off the crows that harassed him in the fields.
On the other hand, i don't how in hell a .38 caliber comes in the picture, an if Ravoux had more than one gun in his chest, but in such case, René had a proper gun to twirl, as if this added some sense to the true story.
Concerning the doctor's report in that the wound was made by a small caliber gun, penetrating in his superior abdomen, in an obliquous angle, that went to lodge near his vertebral column, is not consensually accepted as being result of homicide; known different opinions explain how such was feasible, in case of suicide.
Also noteworthy that Van Gogh didn't receive the shot, as it was believed, in the wheat field near a cemitery as, according to two witnesses, such happened in the so called Vila Chaponval, some 900 yards from the Inn, in an alley (Rue Boucher), precisely a spot that René often frequented. This brings the question: have they eventually met there and their differences resulted in a fatal struggle ?. Notwithstanding Madame Liberge (one of the witnesse's daughter), while attesting that the incident did not take place in front of the cemetery, stated that he truly entered a small yard in the said street, hiding behind a dunghill, having then commited the act that took him to die hours later.
Other inconsistencies in the homicide version are advanced, namely through a more analytic reading of the famous last letter, and his previous symbolic suicide act by swallowing his paint.
So it seems as both the biographers book and the auctioned pistol fall into the Caveat Emptor category
.
On a different note, to conclude that the gun in discussion, being a Liege product is an irrelevant factor, as also typically unmarked, is something i am not able to digest.
Being made in Liege is not irrelevant ... at all, as i fail to agree that Liege products were not marked, even humble outputs (as per own witnessing), when we consider that Napoleon having stepped in, in the period concerned, imposed hard rules in the matter. Indeed in such period a boom of production took place, in quality of all grades, and not only unreliable cheap versions. Actually the Lefaucheux 7 m/m caliber was a secondary version. The actual model, as it first came out, was a large 12 m/m, which reached a huge success, being exported to multiple countries, namely to the USA for their Civil War, being issued to cavalry soldiers, especially in the states of Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and Wisconsin. Remember that by then, as even since 1854, this pistol was notable as being the
first revolver to use self-contained metallic cartridges rather than loose powder, pistol ball, and percussion caps. It was only in after the said war (circa 1870's) that the Colt manufacturer came in the scene with the cartridge ammunition, long after father Samuel has died; in fact we can read that he was reluctant to change his pistol ignition system, on grounds that out in the prairie, the common men were able to depend only only themselves to fabricate their own ammo using self obtained lead & powder raw materials.
Concerning the (forbidden) wearing of two pistols, one must first ponder on these inventions time line. While at a later period cartridge ammo pistol reloading was so fast as in rather less than one minute, cap & ball reloading was a saga, an unfeasible procedure to take place in battle, not to say in a eventual gun fight. One can read chronicles in that the wearing of more than one (or two) pistols also happened, as inevitably what a man could do each time he spent out his 5 or 6 rounds, was to to get rid of that gun and immediately go for the next one. Although it is right that Mr. Wyatt Earp, by the time the Tombstone fight took place, equipped with a 'modern' cartridge Smith & Wesson, it is not surprising that he carried it in his coat pocket as, in fact, he was not the central (law) figure, but his brother Virgil, who was the patent local authority, one who certainly carried his gun in a belt holster. Notwithstanding that Wyatt, while in his youth, must have carried the then available cap & ball version .. maybe even a couple of them.
Exception made to the less charismatic but, by far, more effective Remington; apart from its more solid and resistant solid-frame (topstrap) feature, it had the huge advantage of being possible to remove its cylinder, in order to quickly replace it with a pre-loaded spare unit, an operation that could be repeated, depending on the number of spare cylinders one had in one's bag. But justice be made to Samuel Colt, who possessed excellent dealer abilities, always ending up wining army contracts, like also the one in Britain, against the equally solid frame Adams.
On the issue of Hollywood westerns, where it is all about exuberant gunfights where quick draw and fancy twirling of the gun are a vending factor to attract public fascination, i remember once, in a moment of candidness, John Wayne telling his young admirer: this is not about how fast you draw ... but how accurately you take your aim.
.