The Complexities of
The Calling
By Andrew Fowler ARTH 2720 Tues, Thurs @ 2:30
The paintings of Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio are renowned for their
physiological and conceptual complexities; it is for this reason certain ambiguities persist in the
analysis of his work, I would like to review here The Calling of Saint Matthew. Michelangelo
Merisi, gained a particular reputation in Rome for his skill as a painter and sometimes turbulent
behaviors. As Floris van Dijck, a Dutch still life painter, put it “tares grew riotously among the
good grain in Caravaggio’s mind. He would work for a fortnight; and then he would seize a
rapier, and call a boy to follow him as his page, and swagger from one place of recreation to
another”.1 Despite this reputation he was given an important commission to decorate the walls of
the Contarelli Chapel.
The Contarelli Chapel resides in the church of San Luigi dei Francesi Rome. It is not
entirely clear when Caravaggio was given the commission but Friedlaender places the
commission around 1595 to 1597 and finished in the year 1601.2 The Contarelli chapel belonged
to the heirs of French cardinal Matteu Contarelli, who left money in his will for the completion
of the high alter, façade and for the decoration of the chapel.3 Michelangelo completed these
paintings, as nearly all of his works, in oil. The painting that I would like to consider is The
Calling of Saint Matthew, it lies as one of the side pieces within the Conartelli Chapel. The
Calling is a large painting measuring 332 x 340 cm. Even up till today The Calling has resided in
the same location it has for centuries, where it was originally presented, in the Contarelli Chapel.
I chose this painting because it challenges your perceptions, The Calling makes you think
and wonder. This painting is beautiful but at the same time commanding and monumental. I have
had the opportunity to see this painting first hand, to study it with my charcoals and drawing
paper. Entering the cathedral of San Luigi dei Francsi now, probably was not much different
from then, 415 years ago. There is very little natural light in the church of San Luigi and at the
Contarelli Chapel there is even less. There in the Chapel you see three faint images coming out
of the darkness; illuminate the paintings and this effect is multiplied. The most powerful of these
paintings is, in my opinion, The Calling of Saint Matthew. Within that painting there is a
brooding figure to the far left, it is this figure I believe to be the protagonist, Saint Matthew.
According to Hinks4 Caravaggio may very well have been living at the palazzo Del
Monte all the way up to November of 1600. This would have allowed Michelangelo access to the
large room that is seen in The Calling. This places the setting of The Calling indoors as the
scriptural setting is somewhat ambiguous: “And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a
man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he
arose, and followed him.” Only the “receipt of custom” is mentioned here, which is simply a
house or booth set up for the collection of taxes.
The time of day is also somewhat ambiguous, in the painting there is only one window by
which little light penetrates through its oilskin pane5. This darkening of his studio rooms allows
Caravaggio to manipulate light, adding a new and very important character to his compositions.
Because of Caravaggio’s commitment to naturalism (as observed by his contemporary Bellori)6 I
believe that he modified his studio space to paint what he saw as authentically as possible. Court
documents can hint at this from a tenant dispute with Caravaggio for damage done to the ceiling
and walls of a place he could have used as a studio.7 Meaning he probably manipulated his studio
to allow for the effects seen in his paintings, thus it is likely the setting is indoors set within his
studio.
The fun in this painting really begins when you look at the people involved, Caravaggio’s
strength shine when it comes to depiction people in their splendor and ever present mortality.
Here we see seven male figures, five of which are seated around a customs table, counting
money.8 First let’s look at the group in the center, the two figures here are turned to the call of
the lord, illuminated by his divine light. Both figures are dressed in luxurious garb of a modern
style. The figure with black and white sleeves is seen in profile, facing Christ with interest and
surprise. Meanwhile the opposite figure leans back in uncertainty leaning on the older bearded
man, who has been traditionally identified as Matthew.
I would like to explore the possibility the older confused gentleman usually identified as
Saint Matthew is actually pointing to the true Matthew, the younger brooding gentleman at the far
end of the table. First let’s follow the light cutting a diagonal line across the background wall, you
can see that the light lie’s directly upon the shoulders of saint to be. 9 Then there is way in which
the elderly man, hitherto been identified as Matthew, is pointing; this man’s hand is neither curved
nor foreshortened, it seems as though he is pointing past himself in a sort of “who him” gesture.10
Caravaggio was known to reuse models, we see in this painting alone the use of two models
(middle group) who appeared in his previous paintings The Cardsharps and The Fortune Teller.
Oddly the figure who is traditionally seen as Matthew, is not the same protagonist as in the other
two paintings in the Contarelli Chapel; leading to further speculation.
On the far right entering the room there are the two standing figures, the first figure is
that of Christ, hand uplifted, pointing meekly; reminiscent of Caravaggio’s name sake from the
Creation of Adam in the Sistine Chapel. The second figure in front of Christ or following him is
Peter. Theses figure are juxtaposed against the others sitting around the table. The two travelers
are wearing a more timeless robe, showing that they do not pertain to the world in which they are
about to shatter. Interestingly through radiography we see that Peter was added in after as an
alteration, while at the same time the figure of Christ was darkened into the shadows.11
It is not entirely clear why the apologetic figure of Peter was added in, and from what I
can tell all of possible answers given are mere speculation. So I would like to make my own
conjecture. Based on radiography we see that Christ’s figure stood alone, a massive figure of
power and force using an informal beckoning gesture. This first installation caused quite a
reaction, especially among his contemporaries.12 So it is in my opinion that one reason
Caravaggio might have reworked this painting has to do with the ambiguity of his Matthew. By
adding another figure (Peter) who is clearly pointing to the younger man –which is not so odd in
the depiction of Matthew see The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci- Caravaggio clarifies to a
certain extent the identity of the saint.
Another, possibly coexisting to the previous postulation of saint peter’s presence, could
have to do with the first altarpiece painted, called Saint Matthew with the Angel, which failed to
win approval by the clergy of S. Luigi dei Francesi.13 Caravaggio painted Peter in, as an
iconographical representation of the church, imposing on Christ, or truth. This could possibly be
a representation of Caravaggio’s own sentiment towards the churches reaction to his own
paintings.
Finally I would like to take a quick look at the brooding young man who I believe to the
Saint in question. This young man is holding in one hand a purse of coins (usually an
iconographical element attributed to Matthew) and with the other hand he is receiving money
from the surprised bearded gentleman. Since Matthew is usually seen as the tax collector,
wouldn’t it make sense that Matthew is the young man collecting the money? 14 The ‘Vocation’
here shows the saint in the moment just before he lets go of his worldly vices, the moment just
before his final conversion.
The lighting of the ‘Vocation’ is stark and theatrical congruent with Caravaggio’s mature
Roman style.15 The light plays an imperative role in Caravaggio’s paintings or according to
Marangoni16 “the absolute protagonist is once again the light that models form and space” The
light here is symbolic, representing divine grace; we see Matthew in this painting split between
light and darkness, earth and heaven. “All this is reinforced by a beam of light flooding in at an
angle behind Christ, extending his gesture, and resting lightly on the shoulders of the evangelist
to be.”(A. Hass)17
Caravaggio’s use of color in the ‘Vocation’ is not unlike most of his other paintings. He
rarely used a Vermillion and azure, when he did he would weaken them saying it was the poison
of the tints.18 Over all the painting is warm with a strong luminescence. The ‘Vocation’ was
painted in a way to allow the layers of oil glaze to refract, producing figures that seem to glow.
The texture is that of oil on canvas with thinly applied layers of paint, creating a smooth yet even
finish.
The ‘Vocation’ follows the precepts of scientific perspective but does not make them
overtly obvious; it seems Caravaggio simply wanted to portray the scene as accurately from life
as possible. When it comes to spatial divisions Caravaggio divided The Calling horizontally into
two parts: an upper portion lite softly and devoid of anything save an opaque window, then there
is the lower portion that the figures occupy. The genius of Caravaggio lies in his use of light and
shadow, in this he is a true master. Caravaggio inadvertently started a movement and invented a
radically new form of painting called Tenebrism. Tenebrism is the stark contrast of lighted
figures and dark if not black background. The eye in this painting is drawn to the hand of Christ
and the bearded man pointing, creating movement across the painting.
Now I would like to look at another painting from one of Caravaggio’s contemporaries,
Giovanni Baglione. Baglioni and Michelangelo had a long standing rivalry, while Caravaggio
and those in his circle claimed plagiarism of his style (which in reality is not far from the truth).
Baglione claimed defamation to his reputation, eventually Baglione filed a libel suit against
Caravaggio to which Caravaggio was placed in house arrest.19 Baglione used tenebrism much in
the same way as Caravaggio, though his [Baglione] paintings seem more painterly and the
shadows fall across the form much smoother, that is without as much complexity. In
Caravaggio’s paintings you see that he gave more attention to form physical attributes such as
anatomy. If you look closely you can see who the master is and who the imposter is.
In the end The Calling of Saint Matthew is more than what can be described or analyzed
academically, the painting is profoundly emotional and despite this heroic moment in time,
relatable. We all know how it feels to be called out against our own vices or behaviors. Surely
we have the capacity to relate to the responses posed by the five figures around the counting
table. The Calling draws you in, prompting you to feel and react; from the power exuding by the
upraised hand of Christ to the pulling, gripping introversion of the young Saint Matthew. The
Calling is one of Caravaggio’s first large scale paintings, one might say the beginning of his
rather short career as a true master of light and Shadow.
Detail from The Inspiration of St. Matthew and The Martyrdom of St. Matthew. Notice
the similarities between the two figure and the differences they share from the figure in
The Calling of St. Matthew.
Giovanni Baglione, Sacred Love and Profane Love, 1602. Oil on canvas, 240 x 143 cm.
Rome, Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica di Palazzo Barberini.
1
Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio: His Life, His Legend, His Works, Roger Hinks 1953 pg. 53
Caravaggio Studies, Walter Friedlaender, 1969 pg. 102
3
Caravaggio, Howard Hibbard,1983, pg. 91
4
R. Hinks (as in 1), p. 65
5
W. Friedlaender (as in 2), p. 109
6
V. Sgarbi, Caravaggio, 2007, p.41
7
J. Varriano Caravaggio: the Art of Realism, 2006, p. 8
8
W. Friedlaender (as in 2), p. 108
9
A. Hass Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes Vol. 51, (1988), p. 250
10
A. Hass (as in 9) p. 247
11
R. Hinks (as in 1) p. 64
12
V. Sgarbi, (as in 6) p. 14
13
R. Hinks (as in 1) p. 57
14
A.Hass (as in 9) p. 246
15
W. Friedlaender (as in2) p. 105
16
M. Marangoni, Il Caravaggio, 1992 p. 794
17
A. Hass (as in 9) p. 250
18
V. sgarbi, Caravaggio, 2007, p. 41
-Bellori on Caravaggio
19
R. Hinks (as in 1) p. 65
2