🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of valuable gems or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take 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 these days a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, 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, authorities across the globe have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive 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 famous painting from the same museum, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent heist of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” 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 highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering taken items by melting down or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a bigger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and observing that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing precious items in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy 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 most solid protective measures for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which occurred between morning hours local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the historic structure had mostly focused on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an in-house team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the artworks from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and currently France simply has no money.”