Sarah Barber

Renaissance-Contemporary Art History

Tue & Thu @ 4:00pm
12/3/2014

Art History Final Paper: The Supper at Emmaus by Caravaggio

In my opinion, the piece The Supper at Emmaus (created in London) depicts

the conclusive, resolving moment in the story/ life of Christ as told in the Bible.
After the crucifixion, Christ is resurrected and appears again to some of his
disciples. Initially, they dont know its him, but this work freezes the moment
when the two disciples recognize their risen Savior (Bleem, 2010). This work

is an important piece because it does depict such a significant moment, but it

does so in such a way as to make the viewers at the time of Caravaggio better
able to relate to Christ.
This piece was finished in 1601 and commissioned by Ciriaco Mattei, who
was a Roman nobleman (Mukern, 2011). At 56 in x 72.2 in (wikipedia.org),
this oil painting has life-size figures (khanacademy.org). This work was
originally commissioned in London, and resides there in the National Gallery
today (wikipedia.org).
I chose to write about this piece because of all the artists we studied in this
class, Caravaggio was likely my favorite. The sensual nature of Baroque art is
very appealing to me, and Caravaggios works are outstanding examples of the
techniques and feelings utilized during this time. As a person who identifies as
Christian, I enjoy much of the religious art. While looking over some of his
artworks, I discovered that Caravaggio painted two very similar depictions of
this scene. I find it intriguing when an artist does that, so I decided to pursue
this work further so I could understand the differences between the two.
The subject in this piece is clearly the Savior and his disciples at the supper.
There are many things going on within the subject matter in the painting, and
much of it is very symbolic. We begin with people themselves. An art critic

from the late 1600s by the name of Bellori was very critical of this piece for
many reasons, one of them being that he didnt approve of the fact that the innkeeper was wearing a hat. This was an inappropriate way to behave in front of
God. However, Charles Scribner III in In Alia Effigie: Caravaggios London
Supper at Emmaus that Caravaggio made that decision very deliberately to
demonstrate that the inn-keeper was very much not a part of this gathering, and
had no clue as to Christs identity (Scribner, 1977).
The folks at Khan Academy argue that there is a sense of the present and
that we are invited to join at the table. There is a place open for us, Christs
arms are wide open and welcoming, and the basket of fruit is actually hanging
off the table as if it has been pushed to us to take. They make the point that this
was an important move of the Counter Reformation of the Catholic Church at
the time (khanacademy.org).
In the article by John Varriano entitled Caravaggio and the Decorative
Arts in the Two Suppers at Emmaus, he focuses in on the ornate carpeting
draped over the table and the pitcher sitting on the table. He contends that
carpet on the table very closely resembles a Muslim prayer rug and has a near
east feel. This likely hearkens back to Byzantine-influenced painting Madonna

Enthroned and was intended to confer dignity and majesty on the subject
(Varriano, 1986).
Another interesting symbol is the shell pinned to the clothing of the
disciple on the right. This is considered to be the pilgrim shell, indicating that
none of us has reached our goal yet, but we are constantly on the move to get
there (Bleem, 2010).
I decided to compare this piece with its related piece The Supper at
Emmaus, painted by Caravaggio, but about five or six years down the road and
in Milan this time. I found it interesting that theyre almost the same with a few
exceptions. The first being that Christ now has a beard. On Wikipedia, it said
that Caravaggio may have been depicted in this way because in the Gospel of
Mark (16:12), it tells us that Jesus appeared to them in another form, so this
may be why his face was clean shaven in the first painting because Christ was
believed to be bearded (wikipedia.org). It makes me wonder why then, the
addition of the beard in the second painting. Also, the inn-keeper seems to be
much older in the second painting, and now has an elderly woman with him.
The food on the table has moved back off the edge and is now much more
sparse than it had been in the first picture.

These pieces are important in the context of art history because they
demonstrate the ideas of the Counter Reformation---the updating of the
church---and encapsulate many of the characteristics of Baroque art.

Works Cited:
1. Bleem, Jerry; Table companion. U.S. Catholic. Vol. 75, Issue 6. June
2010. Web. Accessed December 3, 2014.
2. Murken, Daniel J.; Supper at Emmaus. Priest. Vol. 67, Issue 4. April
2011. Web. Accessed December 3, 2014.
3. Wikipedia. Supper at Emmaus (Caravaggio), London. Web. Accessed
December 3, 2014.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supper_at_Emmaus_%28Caravaggio%29,_
London
4. Khan Academy. Caravaggio, Supper at Emmaus. Web. Accessed
December 3, 2014. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/monarchyenlightenment/baroque-art1/baroque-italy/v/caravaggio-the-supper-atemmaus-1601
5. Scribner III, Charles; In Alia Effigie: Caravaggios London Supper at
Emmaus. Art Bulletin. Vol. 59, Issue 3. September 1977. Web.
Accessed December 3, 2014.
6. Varriano, John; Caravaggio and the Decorative Arts in the Two Suppers
at Emmaus. Art Bulletin. Vol. 68, Issue 2. June 1986. Web. Accessed
December 3, 2014.