The Louvre Heist, Explained: How Thieves Stole $102 M. in Jewels

It’s not every day that one of the world’s most well-attended museums gets robbed, but that’s exactly what happened on Sunday, when thieves broke into the Louvre during broad daylight and ran off with an array of bejeweled objects worn by French royals of years past. The heist has captured the world’s attention—which, perhaps, makes sense given that no other institution sees as many visitors annually as the Louvre. But the impact of the robbery has been most acutely felt in France, where it has become a symbol of wounded national pride. Politicians have denounced the museum, and its director has faced calls to resign. In the process, a range of questions have arisen: How did the Louvre not detect the robbery? How did it happen in less than 10 minutes? How much are those jewels worth, anyway? Below, here’s your guide to the Louvre heist, with updates to come as news emerges from Paris, where the robbery has become the unexpected star of a week that also includes the opening of Art Basel Paris and the reopening of the Fondation Cartier pour l’art contemporain. On Sunday, two thieves conducted their heist in a matter of minutes, leaving with nine objects that French authorities have described as highly valuable. The robbers used a device known as a monte-meubles, or a kind of moving staircase that is frequently used in Paris to undertake construction and renovation efforts. At the top, they used what officials labeled “small chainsaws” to break through a window and enter the Galerie d’Apollon, where a wide array of jewels formerly held by French royalty are regularly on view. The theft was a bold one, given that it took place in broad daylight and while other visitors were in the museum. The robbers smashed cases, setting off alarms as they did so, and ran off with their spoils. According to French investigators, as they absconded, the thieves accidentally dropped one of their stolen items: a crown belonging to Empress Eugénie. That crown has since been recovered, but the fate of the remaining eight objects remains in doubt. Laurent Nuñez, the French interior minister, quickly labeled the stolen objects “invaluable,” saying that they were “of immeasurable heritage value.” But since the day of the heist, French authorities have negated his statement, saying that the jewels may actually be worth $102 million—an amount that would make them far less expensive than other artworks housed at the Louvre, including the Mona Lisa. Still, that sum could make this heist the most costly one in the museum’s history, and anyway, per French officials, their monetary value can’t account for their importance to the country’s people. Another complicating factor is that the stolen items weren’t privately insured, according to the government. Investigators have released a list of the remaining stolen items that have not yet been found. These include an emerald necklace belonging to Empress Marie-Louise that includes 1,138 diamonds; two brooches belonging to Empress Eugénie, which contain more than 2,500 diamonds combined; and a tiara worn by Queen Marie-Amélie and Queen Hortense that has 1,083 diamonds and 24 sapphires. Whether the Louvre’s security systems worked as they should remains an open question. A leaked audit from the French government suggests that the museum was severely lacking in this department. According to that audit, these systems were “outdated and inadequate.” One-third of the CCTV cameras in the Gallerie d’Apollon did not work, the report claimed, and the museum had failed to modernize outmoded technology. One cause was overtourism, according to the report. “Under the effect of increasing visitor numbers, the museum’s technical equipment became obsolete much more rapidly,” the report said. As the investigation has continued on, some French authorities have claimed otherwise. “The Louvre museum’s security apparatus did not fail, that is a fact,” Rachida Dati, the French culture minister, told the National Assembly. “The Louvre museum’s security apparatus worked.” The museum itself has responded to the allegations in the leaked audit, but its director, Laurence des Cars, said in an email obtained by the New York Times, “When I took office, I warned of the need to strengthen our security architecture.” She will appear before French politicians on Wednesday. Almost as soon as the heist happened, it became politicized, with elected representatives on the right using the occasion to denounce the left. “The Louvre is a global symbol of our culture,” Jordan Bardella, president of the far-right National Rally party, wrote on X. “This heist, which allowed thieves to steal the Crown Jewels of France, is an intolerable humiliation for our country. How far will the decay of the State go?” Marine Le Pen, a former leader of that party, also wrote on X, “Any attack on national heritage is a wound to the French soul. Nevertheless, responsibility requires us to note that our museums and historic buildings are not secured to the level of the threats weighing on them. We must react.” While Sunday’s robbery may be the most high-profile heist at the Louvre in quite a few years, it isn’t the first time the museum has been heisted. Vincenzo Peruggia famously pilfered the Mona Lisa in 1911. (That Leonardo painting was recovered two years later and remains one of the Louvre’s main attractions, though the work has weathered its fair share of vandalism in the decades since.) Meanwhile, in 1983, several objects from the arms and armor galleries vanished without explanation; the objects weren’t recovered until 2021. There was also the time, in 1990, when a Renoir painting was cut from its frame and taken away. This isn’t even the first time that a diamond-studded object has been taken from the Louvre. At the break of dawn on one morning in 1976, three thieves worked together to steal King Charles X’s sword. In an eerie echo the present, those thieves also used a metal scaffold to reach the museum’s second floor. After days of silence, Louvre director Laurence des Cars appeared before the French Senate on Wednesday. She denied that the museum’s security systems had failed, but she did say that certain elements of it were not up to snuff. “There is a weakness at the Louvre, and I fully accept it,” she said, adding that what the museum now needed to do was secure its “immediate surroundings.” “I also wish to request the Ministry of the Interior to study whether the installation of a police station within the museum would be feasible,” des Cars said. Moreover, she added, the heist spurred her to try to leave her post. “Last Sunday, after having noted alongside the Minister of Culture and the Minister of the Interior the consequences of the terrible attack that we had just suffered, I offered my resignation to the Minister of Culture,” des Cars said. “She refused it.”