🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – including necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the same year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as quickly as possible.”

If the items were to stay whole, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to go public about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and selling of stolen art is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Altering taken items by melting down or reshaping does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing equipment and observing that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” said an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old building had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on protection.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and at present France lacks sufficient money.”