This past Sunday, October 19th, the Louvre, one of the world’s largest, most-visited, and admired museums in Paris, France, experienced a tragic jewelry heist. It was carried out by four unidentified thieves who are still at large, holding priceless pieces of history. Using a ladder to reach the second floor, the robbers broke into the Apollo Gallery, where the most precious and valuable crown jewels were housed. In broad daylight, they stole eight Napoleonic jewels worth around 88 million Euros, or 100 million USD. Investigators suspect that the thieves belong to a criminal gang and will attempt to resell these stolen items on the black market — a crime that, due to the jewels’ antiquity, may not yield as much profit as people think.
After being closed for three days, the Louvre re-opened on Wednesday, October 22nd, but entry into the Apollo Gallery crime scene was restricted. As people swarmed into the museum with cameras gripped in their hands, they could not believe that invaluable symbols of French history, culture, and pride could be stolen in a split second. That said, domestic and global attention has shifted to Laurence Des Cars, the director of the Louvre, and other administrative figures, who critics are blaming for maintaining poor, antiquated security systems that failed to detect the criminals in advance. Data shows that the Louvre has not devoted as much budget to its security systems as it did twenty years ago, and authorities question whether Ms.Des Cars had prioritized the museum’s protection in the first place. However, she confessed that recent security efforts focused on preventing small-scale acts of desecration, especially by paint- or soup-throwing visitors. No one in the Louvre administration was prepared for this hundred-million-dollar heist, nor could they have ever imagined it.
In addition to its cinematic plot, the heist exemplifies how thieves are no longer only targeting renowned paintings but also cultural institutions’ valuable artifacts that can be easily deconstructed and sold. Only a couple of days after the crime, there are already predictions that these artifacts have been broken down and their expensive parts extracted to be sold. The rarity of scandals like this is what makes it so striking, leaving many around the world questioning the direction society is headed. In all likelihood, the thieves don’t care about or appreciate the historical, cultural, or emotional value of these gems, and therefore would not bat an eye when dismantling, melting, and selling them. Additionally, when the jewelry is dismantled, there’s a high liquidity, whereas a stolen da Vinci would have low liquidity, as it’s easily recognizable. As the world grapples with the loss of irreplaceable symbols of France’s rich history, many are left feeling unsettled and cynical about the scandal’s moral components.
Works Cited
Alderman, Liz. “Why Weren’t the Jewels Stolen from the Louvre Insured?” The New York Times, 22 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/2025/10/22/business/louvre-robbery-jewelry-heist-insurance.html.
Breeden, Aurelien, and Ségolène Le Stradic. “Louvre Reopens for First Time since Brazen Jewelry Robbery.” The New York Times, 22 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/2025/10/22/world/europe/louvre-museum-robbery-open-paris.html.
Granados, Samuel, and Elena Shao. “How the Louvre Jewelry Heist Unfolded.” The New York Times, 20 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/10/20/world/europe/louvre-robbery-jewelry-heist-photos-maps.html.
Palumbo, Jacqui, and Caitlin Danaher. “Museum Heists Have Changed. Why the Louvre Robbery Is a Worrying Escalation.” CNN, Cable News Network, 21 Oct. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/10/20/style/france-louvre-heist-worrying-escalation-intl-hnk
Ségolène Le Stradic. “Stolen Louvre Jewelry Worth over $100 Million, Paris Prosecutor Says.” The New York Times, 21 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/2025/10/21/world/europe/louvre-robbery-jewelry.html.
