🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of violent retail store thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have reduced spending on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the taking 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 spate of robberies of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and sale of taken items 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 keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to collect a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by melting down or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in updating systems and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say showing precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“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 escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid protective measures for structures should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures 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 reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when guards rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in France about the historic structure had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and less on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient resources.”