🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the globe have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by a royal that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the items were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often hesitant 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 taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the media. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your children.”

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

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to bypass protections. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic structure had primarily focused on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The museum has an in-house team of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the collection from fires and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient resources.”