🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have cut back on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable 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 a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, 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 millions, the theft of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as quickly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

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

In the previous years, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

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

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “significant” and “ongoing” delays in updating systems and noting that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to remove entirely.

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

The best security systems for structures should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but historic institutions may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be hard to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in France about the 232-year-old structure had mostly centered on crowd control in the past decade, and less on protection.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their mission is mostly to protect the artworks from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient resources.”