Is There a Painting of the Last Supper in the Louvre

From time to time, tourists in the Louvre ask where the Last Supper is. When they ask about it, most of the time, they refer to the most famous Last Supper, the one by Leonardo Da Vinci. Most of the time, they are disappointed to learn that they are in the wrong place and that what they look for is located in Milan in the refectory of the Dominican convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie. Nevertheless, the Louvre has a lot to offer in terms of the Last Supper.

First of all, the Louvre owns The Wedding Feast at Cana by Veronese, one of the most famous paintings of the Italian Renaissance. Many people are mixing it with Da Vinci’s work not only for their mutual fame but also because The Wedding Feast at Cana can be seen as a preamble to The Last Supper in terms of sacrifice and eucharist. We have an entire post about this.

Veronese  – The Weeding Feast at Cana. Credit The Yorck Project – GNU Free Documentation License.

Furthermore and whatever, the Louvre Museum offers a unique opportunity to view alternative 17th-century interpretations of this iconic scene of The Last Supper. Moreover, as you will see at the end of this post, the Louvre has even more to offer to Da Vinci’s Last Supper enthusiasts.

This article delves into the fascinating world of The Last Supper paintings and unravels their secrets. We explore the symbolic meanings behind the positioning of the figures. Join us as we embark on a journey through time and artistry, delving into the enigmatic world of The Last Supper at the Louvre.

Why is the Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci so famous?

Some people believe that Da Vinci’s Last Supper is the first representation. This is totally wrong. The earliest depiction of The Sacred Meal was in the frescoes of the Catacomb of Rome, where the early Christian community was secretly gathering.
At this early time, the Last Supper was represented around semi-circular tables. The 6th-century Mosaic of the Last Supper in Sant’ Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna is organized that way.

But even if Leonardo Da Vinci’s Last Supper is far from being the first one, it is a very important milestone in Art History because it is usually considered the first expression of the High Renaissance due to its high level of harmony.
But, Da Vinci’s work expressivity representing the apostles‘ emotions also ruptures with the stillness of previous Renaissance Last Supper representations, such as the one from Fra Angelico or Castagno, or even Ghirlandaio.

Fra Angelico, The Last Supper. Credit The Yorck Project – GNU Free Documentation License.

The Last Supper by Andrea del Castagno. Credit The Yorck Project – GNU Free Documentation License.

Rupture and innovation are typical of the Da Vinci Works. You can also see that in Da Vinci’s “The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne,” which drastically changes the classical stillness three-figure composition of previous Virgin and Child with Saint Anne representations.
Da Vinci’s “Virgin and Child with Saint Anne” is one of his most famous masterpieces. It is part of the Louvre collection. Don’t miss it.

The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne by Leonardo da Vinci – Credit The Yorck Project – GNU Free Documentation License.

What is the Last Supper exactly about?

It is the final meal that Jesus shared with his apostles in Jerusalem before his crucifixion, as recorded in the Gospel.
The Gospel tells us that the Last Supper took place during the week of Passover, days after Jesus entered Jerusalem and before he was crucified on Good Friday.
During the meal, Jesus predicts his betrayal by one of the apostles present at the table. In the Last Supper, Jesus also takes bread, breaks it, and gives it to his apostles, saying, “This is my body given to you,” which is the scriptural basis for the Eucharist.
The Last Supper paintings represent one of these two moments.
For example, the one of Fra Angelico depicts the Eucharist focusing on the sacrality of the moment.
Meanwhile, Leonardo Da Vinci depicts the poignant moment when Jesus announces the betrayal of one of his disciples. It is a scene rich with emotion and symbolism, capturing the essence of sacrifice and redemption. The apostles’ surprise and incredulity are present throughout the work and give the scene an amazing sense of movement, which is why it is a milestone in Art History.

Leonardo Da Vinci  – The Last Supper. Credit The Yorck Project – GNU Free Documentation License.

The painting has a storied history with numerous interpretations and adaptations over the centuries. Its enduring popularity is a testament to its timeless appeal and universal theme of faith and betrayal. The Louvre gives you a synthetic vision of the one of the French 17th century.

The Louvre 17th century versions of The Last Supper

There are three main versions of the Last Supper in the Louvre permanent collection’s galleries.
The oldest one is by Frans II Pourbus, which was painted in 1618; the one from Mathieu Le Nain was executed around 1655; meanwhile, the one by Philippe de Champaigne was painted 45 years after the first one in 1662

The Last Supper by Frans II Pourbus

The Last Supper is the most famous religious painting of Frans II Pourbus. Its composition was widely admired in the XVII and XVIII centuries. The most famous enthusiast of this amazing work was Nicolas Poussin himself (Nicolas Poussin is the most famous painter of the French 17th century).
Frans II Pourbus‘ rendition of The Last Supper captures the solemnity and gravity of the scene, emphasizing the emotional turmoil and tension among the disciples. His meticulous attention to detail and expressive brushwork bring the narrative to life, allowing viewers to immerse themselves in the drama unfolding before them. The composition is imbued with a sense of urgency and foreboding, hinting at the impending betrayal and sacrifice that will soon take place.
Frans II Pourbus’s Last Supper is strongly influenced by Da Vinci. Like him, it captures the apostles’ moment of surprise and incredulity.
Nevertheless, there are a lot of differences with the Da Vinci work, first of all in the composition of the painting.
Meanwhile, in the Da Vinci work, the table is in the foreground with all the apostles behind it, in the one of Frans II Pourbus, there are four apostles in the foreground showing their backs to the spectator.
We can also notice that Pourbus inverted the position of Saint Peter (on the right of Jesus) and Saint John (on the left of Jesus) relatively to Da Vinci’s work.
Lastly, one of the four apostles in the foreground is immediately identifiable as Judas. He is wearing a small purse in which we can guess the 30 silver coins, which are the price of his treason.

The Mathieu Le Nain Last Supper

The Mathieu Le Nain painting is much smaller than the others (35 7/8 x 46 1/2 in, or 91.1 x 118.1 cm). However, it is a very interesting one due to its very specific composition. Indeed, instead of Jesus, this is Judas, who is in the center of the composition, at the right of Jesus, who is at the end of the table.
Judas is in the center of the work, and the painting is all about his treason, which is underlined not only because of the purse he is wearing in his left hand but also because he is looking to the spectator, who is taking him as a witness.

Nevertheless, Mathieu Lenain also gives space to the Eucharist, depicting, on the table, an imposing bread between Judas and Jesus (with Saint John and Saint Peter in the background).

This amazing Mathieu Lenain work is in the French Chiaroscuro room with the works of George de La Tour (The most famous French Chiaroscuro painter of the 17th century).

Why is Mathieu Lenain’s Last Supper in the room dedicated to chiaroscuro? Well, because it is an amazing Chiaroscuro work. Mathieu Lenain perfectly knows how to play with light, using it to hierarchize the two facets of the Last Supper, putting Juda’s face in the dark and the big bread in the light!

Mathieu Le Nain   – The Last Supper. Credit WikiArt.

The Philippe de Champaigne’s Last Supper

Compared to Mathieu Le Nain, Philippe de Champaigne’s interpretation of The Last Supper offers a more contemplative and serene depiction of the scene, focusing on the spiritual themes of communion and redemption.
His use of light and shadow creates a sense of ethereal beauty, infusing the composition with a sense of divine presence. The figures are rendered with a sense of reverence and humility, inviting viewers to reflect on the deeper meanings of the narrative and their own relationship to faith and salvation.

The specialists believe that Phillipe de Champaigne probably took his inspiration from Frans II Pourbus (His Last Supper was visible in the Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles church in Paris). The composition is quite similar. Judas, for example, is in the same position on the table, with a coat of the same kind of ochre color and the famous purse of 30 silver coins in his left hand.

But notably, De Champaigne did not follow Pourbus about the position of Saint John and Saint Peter, as with him, they return to the traditional position followed by da Vinci: John on the right of Jesus, Peter on his left.

But this is not the main difference between the two works.

The main difference is that in Philippe de Champaigne’s work, even if Juda’s treason is shown with the representation of the purse, it is not the subject of the painting. What is represented is not the moment of the apostles’ surprise and incredulity after Jesus reveals that one of them betrayed him.

No, this is not the subject: Jesus is manipulating bread, and beside it on the table is a cup (the chalice).
The main subject of the painting is the Words of Institution, which Jesus said when he consecrated bread and wine for the first time during the Last Supper, which was also his last night.

The Words of Institution are central to Christian Liturgy. Eucharistic scholars sometimes refer to them simply as the verba (Latin for “words”).

Last Supper by Philippe de Champaigne. Credit Yves Broaden-horizons.fr

A comparative reflection on the Louvre’s three Last Supper versions

As we explore these three alternative versions of The Last Supper at the Louvre, we gain a deeper appreciation for the complexities and nuances of this iconic scene. Each painting offers a unique perspective on the themes of betrayal, sacrifice, and redemption, inviting viewers to contemplate the deeper meanings embedded within the composition. The experience of viewing these masterpieces in person is a testament to the enduring power of art to provoke thought, evoke emotion, and transcend cultural boundaries.

It is also clear that the Phillipe de Champaigne version of the Last Supper is an open door to the Reformation and Counter-Reformation subjects.
The Eucharist during the 16th-century Reformation was interpreted in various forms in Christianity. The Roman Catholic reaction to the reformation, called counter-reformation, made the Eucharist very central in its doctrine. This is why painting started to focus on it more.

There is, for example, one painting from Nicolas Poussin from 1641 called “Jesus Christ establishing the Eucharist,” in which the table is in the background and all the apostles are in the foreground to receive the bread from Jesus like in a mass.
Because all the guests had already left the table, we have considered the composition too far away from the Da Vinci work (the subject of this post) to be considered a Last Supper painting. But this is only a point of view.

But the Louvre, being the most famous and biggest museum in the world, has even more to offer those who want to immerse themselves in the complex subject of the Last Supper.

The three Last Supper paintings in the Louvre are like the Three Musketeers: they are four.

The Louvre, in addition to its three 17th-century Last Supper paintings, also has in its permanent collection one of the very first copies of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper.

It was commissioned in Milan in 1506 to Marco d’Oggiono, one of Da Vinci’s best pupils, only a few years after his master had completed the original at the convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan in 1498.

The Louvre copy has an immense value and may be easily called a replica.

The Marco d’Oggiona copy also now has even more value as the mural by Da Vincci has deteriorated prematurely.

Indeed, Marco d’Oggiono has faithfully reproduced all the characteristics of Leonardo’s work and art, from the strong expression of faces and physiognomies of the apostles to the shimmering colors which are now often in bad stade on the Orignal. But the most impressive is the multitude of details on the banqueting table, which has now almost disappeared from the original.

Last, this copy is also exceptional as it is one the earliest testimonies of the French enthusiasm for the Italian Renaissance paintings.

Indeed, the Constable of France Anne de Montmorency acquired the replica in the 15th century for his chapel at Château d’Écouen, where it hung until 1793.

How the Oggiono Work is part of the Louvre collection? Why it is not displayed there anymore?

The French Revolution sounded the death knell of the French monarchy. Most of the churches and castles were plundered. In 1793 – the year when Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette were beheaded, the Oggiono copy was sent to the “Muséum Central des Arts,” which was the first expression of the Louvre as a museum.

The painting was on display at the Louvre in the 19th century, and after a passage in its storerooms, it was finally sent back in 1980 to its original location after the opening of the Musée National de la Renaissance at Château d’Écouen.

Even If shown in Château d’Écouen, the Louvre is obviously still very much involved in the conservation of its priceless copy. Indeed, the work was recently restored (withdrawal of old varnish and overpaints, etc.) with the participation of the team and expert of Musée de La Renaissance, Musée du Louvre, and Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musées de France (C2RMF)

FAQs