🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their security in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the 2017 heist of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see paperwork establishing proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of stolen art is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or reshaping does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating systems and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when guards rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old building had primarily focused on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to protect the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and at present France lacks sufficient money.”