My recent exploration of the two versions of Caravaggio's Supper at Emmaus launched me on a quest for other treatments of the same subject. And boy did I find a bounty of material from historically famous painters. Herein I present some of the more notable treatments.
Titian
I was able to locate three separate Supper at Emmaus paintings by this world-famous artist: a 1534 version resident in the Walker Art Gallery; a 1533 - 34 version resident in the Louvre: and a 1545 version resident in the National Gallery of Ireland. As shown below, the compositions of the first two are fairly similar with differences restricted to color schemes, tablescape, deployment of the rightmost disciple, and background construct.
![]() |
Titian, Supper at Emmaus, 1534 (Walker Art Gallery) |
![]() |
Titian, Supper at Emmaus, 1533 - 1534 (Louvre) |
The 1545 version of the painting is positioned within a closer, darker space with a setting sun as a backdrop. The Innkeeper is omitted from this version. The smaller table makes for a more intimate environment.
![]() |
Titian, Supper at Emmaus, 1545 (National Gallery of Ireland) |
Veronese
Veronese has two versions of the painting on offer. His 1559 version is one of the most populated that I have encountered on this journey. The painting has a flashback to the preceding journey in the left panel and adults and children dressed in contemporary clothing arrayed around the central players. This is most likely a family portrait. The 1565 - 70 version is much less populated but still has seven adults, one kid, and a dog.
![]() |
Paolo Veronese, Supper at Emmaus, 1559 (Louvre) |
![]() |
Paolo Veronese, Supper at Emmaus, 1565 - 1570 (Museum Boijmans van Beuningen) |
Velázquez
One of the more claustrophobic renditions with tight quarters and no extraneous material. According to one source, Velázquez has followed Caravaggio in that his models are presented with "rustic, unidealized features.” This painting explores contrasts in reactions through "gesture, expression, and dramatic lighting." The tablecloth shows the artists still-life skills.
![]() |
Velázquez, The Supper at Emmaus, 1622 - 1623 (The Met) |
Rembrandt
A total of four Rembrandts covering the subject topic are presented in this survey. The 1628 effort (immediately below) has a strong contra-jure effect with the light source placed behind the subject turning it into a silhouette and undelining Jesus' divinity.
![]() |
Rembrandt, The Supper at Emmaus, c. 1628 (Musée Jacquemart André) |
The 1654 version is a print.
![]() |
Rembrandt, The Supper at Emmaus, c. 1654 (Print, Metropolitan Museum of Art) |
The 1648 version is one of the best of the lot, suffused as it is with serenity. The waiter has a contemporary look. This, the most famous of Rembrandt's efforts on the topic, has the second disciple kneeling at Jesus' feet and the white tablecloth serving as a partial overlay to a more extensive tablecloth.
![]() |
Rembrandt, The Supper at Emmaus, 1648 (Musée du Louvre) |
The 1649 version is very dramatic with a radiant light source emanating from Jesus himself. The limited color palette ensured that the viewer focused on the narrative and emotional resonance rather than color schemes.
![]() |
Rembrandt, The Supper at Emmaus, 1649 (Fitzwilliam Museum) |
Pontorno
This painting utilizes the chiaroscuoro effect and a high light source for visual impact. A beam of light illuminating Jesus' face indicates the moment of the revelation.
This piece was inspired by Dürer's treatment (discussed later) and was originally commissioned by prior Leonardo Buonafede of the Charterhouse in Certosa del Galluzzo for placement in its guest quarters. In addition to Jesus and the Disciples, the monks of the Charterhouse are seen emerging from the dark background to bear witness to the event. It is thought that the figure to the right of Jesus is the Prior.
![]() |
Pontorno, Supper at Emmaus, 1525 (Uffizi) |
Typical full-figured Rubens bodies. Open architecture and background landscape lends an Italianate look to the painting. This was acquired for Felipe IV at the 1640 auction of Rubens' belongings.
![]() |
Peter Paul Rubens, The Supper at Emmaus, c. 1638 (Prado) |
Albrecht Durer
Durer's Emmaus print was one of 36 woodcuts which comprised a series called Small Passions. By far the most flamboyant portrayal of Cleopas who is dressed as a Renaissance traveler. As in the case of Rembrandt's 1649 effort, Jesus is backlit but not so much as to provide the contra-jure effect that is present in the same painter's 1628 effort. Other persons are inserted into the background, a la Pontorno, and Dürer's monogram is visible on the side of the bench facing the viewer.
![]() |
Albrecht Dürer, Supper at Emmaus, 1511 (National Museum of American History) |
Bassano
This was an especially baffling painting for me. First, the full table seems to positioned between Jesus and the disciples; that is, they are not sitting at the sides of the table but at the end. Second, Jesus seems to be sitting uphill of the disciples. Third, the Disciple on the right is showing an unprecedented amount of skin. The dog in the picture looks like and over-sized cat and the cat looks like a rat. The knife in the still life is hanging precariously over the edge.The message is lost in the oddities of the painting.
![]() |
Jacopo Bassano, The Supper at Emmaus, c. 1538 (Kimbell Art Museum) |
Tintoretto
According to the museum, the basic composition of this painting conforms to High Renaissance norms:
- The scene takes place in an enclosed space parallel to the picture plane, defined by a checkered stone floor across the foreground
- Christ's place on the central axis is reiterated by the column over his head and the corner of the table
- The two groups of three figures flanking Christ are regulated by the classical system of contrasting counterbalances.
![]() |
Tintoretto, The Supper at Emmaus, c. 1542 (Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest) |
Francesco de Zurburán
Akin to the Velazquez piece, in terms of population paucity. Play of dark and light with the light source somewhere over the shoulder of the leftmost disciple. Orderly arrangement of the still-life components. Focus on the meal and the "men."
![]() |
Francisco de Zurbarán, Dinner at Emmaus, 1639 (Museo Nacional de San Carlo) |
******************************************************************************
This survey was prompted by curiosity emanating from my recent work comparing Caravaggio’s two treatments of the subject topic. Who else had treated this subject? How had they approached it?
This survey covered 16 artworks from 10 artists with Rembrandt (four), Titian (three), and Veronese (two) contributing multiple pieces to the effort.
The core of the story is Jesus and the two disciples. Some of the efforts limited themselves to that while others extended to include patrons (Pontorno) and family portraits (Veronese).
A broad variety of approaches and techniques were employed by these leading lights of the painting world but they each succeeded in effectively communicating this simple yet powerful story.
No comments:
Post a Comment