Acquisitions of paintings at the Louvre: an unequal and well-hidden treasure

The major "New Renaissance of the Louvre" project (see article) expressly provides for a "Museographic renewal" throughout the museum. Page 16 of the expression of requirements document states: "Phase 1 of the technical upgrading work could also be an opportunity to carry out a museographic renewal in areas of the museum that will not be affected by the new access project but which also deserve an update of the presentation of the collections." We also know that the museum’s director wishes to eventually display fewer works from the collections (see article).

Fewer works than today? We began by looking at the painting department and how it displays its collections. To do this, we looked at whether recent acquisitions (since 2001, i.e. almost 25 years) are shown to visitors, which would be the least they could do, given that they were made with public money. We also tried, through these acquisitions, to understand the Louvre’s policy in this area. As we had already observed, this policy is left to the discretion of the departments, although they are required to strengthen the collection’s strengths and address its weaknesses. In the case of paintings, one might wonder whether the aim is really to strengthen the collection’s strengths or simply to address its weaknesses... It should be noted that our findings do not call into question any particular curator. In many cases, according to the (very reliable) information we have been able to obtain, they are victims of this policy, and those responsible are to be found at the head of the departments and the Louvre itself. Exhibition projects are systematically rejected, acquisitions are regularly refused in favour of purchases that are sometimes very expensive and absolutely redundant... Many curators at the Louvre are suffering, even the best among them. Especially the best among them, we would like to say.

We have therefore compiled an Excel spreadsheet of all the works acquired by the paintings department, regardless of how they were acquired, since 2021, and we are posting a link here to this file so that everyone can access it, use it or check what we have written [1]. This seems all the more useful given that, for a very long time now – following a decision by Henri Loyrette – no exhibitions reviewing recent acquisitions have been organised at the Louvre, as was previously the case.
Here are the conclusions, sometimes very surprising and regrettable, that we have been able to draw from this quantitative study, a discipline that is sometimes very useful for the history of art and museums. One day, it will also be necessary to look at the quality and interest of some of these acquisitions, but we will only touch on this question in this article.

French painting is undoubtedly one of the Louvre’s "strong points" and one that should be reinforced. However, it is difficult to say that this is the case, except for 16th-century painting [2] In fact, the Fontainebleau School and even the regional schools (ill. 1) have been the subject of a remarkable number of acquisitions over the past 25 years, especially when one adds to these additions to the French collections in this field those of the Château de Fontainebleau and the Musée de la Renaissance in Écouen. Nine paintings have entered the collections since 2001, five purchases, one donation from a private individual, one donation from the Friends of the Louvre and one donation by the State, which seems entirely appropriate given the number of quality works coming onto the market and the acquisitions of the two other museums mentioned. All of these acquired works are on display, except for one.

The same cannot be said, by any means, for 17th-century French painting, despite this being one of the great centuries of French painting, for which many high-quality paintings are available on the art market, often at affordable prices, and which would remarkably complement the collections already held at the Louvre, either to reinforce its strengths or to fill obvious gaps.
Since 2001, only fourteen 17th-century French paintings have been purchased. We must set aside one donation (a Louis Cretey) that was earmarked for the Musée des Beaux-Arts in Lyon, and six donations subject to usufruct that are still with their donors. If we add three donations, this makes a total of seventeen 17th-century French paintings that have actually entered the Louvre’s collections. And of these seventeen works, eight, or nearly half, are not on display! Among them, only one of the three donations is on display. To take just one example, the pretty little painting by Jacques Stella donated in 2023 by Daniel Thierry (see news item of 24/5/23) is not on display in the galleries (ill. 2).

18th-century French painting fares little better. Admittedly, there is much fanfare surrounding certain acquisitions such as Chardin’s Strawberry Basket (see the news item of 7/11/23), although it is difficult to understand the necessity of this purchase. But ultimately, in 25 years, only thirteen expensive acquisitions have been made, a figure equivalent to that for French painting. And of these thirteen acquisitions, only six are on display, meaning that seven are not.
There are more donations and bequests than for the 17th century: ten in all [3] To these must be added two donations from the Société des Amis du Louvre, three donations subject to usufruct and two donations in lieu of payment [4]. While the two donations from the Friends of the Louvre are on display, only four of the ten donations and bequests from private individuals are!
Let us add two purchases made thanks to patronage: the nine panels by Oudry painted for the Château de Voré, presented in the Department of Decorative Arts, and the Chardin, which, between two presentations in the provinces, does not currently appear to be on display, which is quite remarkable. This brings the total (excluding deposits and usufruct) to twenty-eight works entered into the Louvre for the French 18th century. Of these twenty-eight works, half, or exactly fourteen, are not on display, such as a sketch by Étienne Parrocel, whose acquisition we announced (see the news item of 24/7/07), but which is awaiting restoration (ill. 3). This is the same proportion as for the 17th century.

French paintings from the 19th century were acquired in greater numbers, no doubt due to the abundance of works on the market and perhaps because the director of the department is a specialist in this period. Some very important paintings were acquired in this field, which it would have been incomprehensible not to acquire, but no doubt just as many were not. We will return to these purchases in more detail in another article.
As before, let us consider the number of acquisitions and the percentage of works on display. However, we will exclude from this count the seven 19th-century paintings acquired for the Louvre’s history collections (there were two for the 18th century and two even date from the 20th century). The percentage is easy to calculate: none of them are on display (ill. 4), since the history of the Louvre is no longer shown, or hardly at all.

Of the remaining thirty-four acquisitions [5], excluding donations subject to usufruct and one deposit, only twenty-three are on display, including eighteen in the paintings department. The others are in the Department of Decorative Arts and even in the Department of Oriental Antiquities, including Félix Thomas’s The Visit of the Pasha of Mosul to the Excavations at Khorsabad, Ancient Nineveh. (see the news item of 27/1/10->2428).]]. This leaves eleven recent acquisitions not on display, including eight purchases and three donations.

For Italian painting, the situation is very mixed: fairly good for Italian primitives up to the 15th century, with regular purchases and most of the works on display, it is weak for the 16th century, with only three works acquired in twenty-five years, two of which are donations from the Friends of the Louvre. A fourth purchase, a panel by the Master of the Cassoni Campana, was made for deposit in Avignon.
As for the 17th and 18th centuries, which should be a priority for the Louvre (which we are told needs to strengthen its strengths, especially as many major works, and not always at excessive prices, are coming up for sale), it is difficult to understand its policy: the results are quite disastrous. Purchases are practically non-existent, and works are hardly ever exhibited. No doubt the current closure of the small cabinets on either side of the Spanish room, which are undergoing renovation, is partly responsible for this situation, especially since the room known as the Salvator Rosa room is now occupied (see the article) by the Cimabue exhibition (one wonders why it is being used for this purpose). But the number of recent acquisitions is so small that they could have been hung elsewhere, particularly in the Grande Galerie. The same applies to the two Portuguese paintings acquired, notably the beautiful 16th-century Resurrection of Christ (see the [news item of 23/10/23]), which is in perfect condition and could easily be shown to visitors.

Thus, in twenty-five years, the Louvre has purchased only one 17th-century Italian painting (!) and four 18th-century paintings, including three by Tiepolo... Of these five paintings, none are on display. We are delighted about the Tiepolo ceiling (see article), but it seems that it is nevertheless scheduled to be hung.
A painting by Alessandro Magnasco was acquired through patronage for immediate deposit at the Musée d’Art et d’Histoire du Judaïsme (see the news item of 13/12/10) and another by Luca Giordano through donation for deposit at the Musée Fabre in Montpellier (see the news item of 27/9/16). These two works can hardly be counted as acquisitions by the Louvre, even though they appear on its inventories. With the exception of a painting donated subject to usufruct that remained with its owner, there are four donations and bequests, and one donation from the Friends of the Louvre. Not one of these paintings is currently hanging in the museum... We are reproducing here a donation made by Marc Fumaroli in 2006, which we had overlooked: it is a 17th-century Italian landscape (ill. 5), anonymous, but appearing in a very high-quality photograph. Only in photo form because, unless we are mistaken, it has never been exhibited, and in any case is not currently on display.

No Spanish paintings are on display, which is understandable since the room is undergoing renovation. Nevertheless, a place could have been found to show these recent acquisitions. It should be noted that purchases of Spanish paintings, which were virtually non-existent for a long time, only really resumed in 2010 and practically ceased in 2018, with the notable exception of the purchase of a Valencian primitive in 2020 (see the news item of 2/9/20).
English painting, for its part, has been neglected at the Louvre for a very long time. With the notable exceptions of two remarkable purchases, a John Martin in 2006 (see the news item of 12/12/06) and a Benjamin West in 2008 (see the news item of 29/7/07, the second painting is not on display...), the only notable additions in over fifteen years have been donations from Christopher Forbes. These are not on display. Once again, a fine way to celebrate a donor. Four American paintings, also donations, are not on display either.
The paintings from Eastern Europe, a significant number of which have entered the museum over the last quarter of a century, are generally hung on the walls... but in a room that is mostly closed.

That leaves the 17th-century Nordic paintings, another of the Louvre’s strong points, which have been badly neglected since the departure of Jacques Foucart, who still managed to get paintings purchased. We will not include in the balance sheet for recent years Rembrandt’s Portrait of Oopjen Coppit, which, after a real farce (see articles), was finally acquired by the Louvre, in partnership with the Rijksmuseum and almost against its will.
So, in the last twenty-five years, there have been only six purchases in total, five of which were made between 2001 and 2004... That’s just one in twenty years for 17th-century Dutch and Flemish art. The purchase of this one (ill. 6), from the Barnabé gallery in 2019, painted for the gallery of Jacques Favereau, advisor to King Louis XIII, had escaped us. At least it is very beautiful and hangs in the galleries.
On the other hand, in 2006 the Louvre received a bequest of two 18th-century landscapes, anonymous but of very high quality, and in 2012 a new bequest of five paintings: two by Jan van Goyen, one by Adriaen van Ostade, one by David Teniers and one by Pieter Giejsels. None of these seven paintings bequeathed to the Louvre, which make up the bulk of the Dutch and Nordic works from the 17th and 18th centuries acquired since 2005, are on display.

These figures, which are indisputable as they were provided by the Louvre itself (via its website, as once again it did not deem it necessary to respond to our questions), show that the museum’s acquisition policy museum’s acquisition policy and the exhibition of these acquisitions is not very brilliant despite many purchases, and that this has hardly improved since Laurence des Cars took over as director of the museum, despite a few isolated successes (including, of course, Overbeck’s The Annunciation - see the news item of 27/3/25).
It should be remembered that the Louvre’s missions, as defined by law, include enriching its collections and making them accessible to the widest possible audience. Does Laurence des Cars really believe that the museum is fulfilling these two missions properly? She wants to exhibit less in order to exhibit better, but she would do better to exhibit more in order to exhibit better.
We will take a closer look at 17th-century French painting in a future article.