🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the historical importance, continuing a pattern that has appeared over the last decade 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 valuable 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 these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation 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 shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – including jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive 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 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items 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 stay whole, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said Lynda Albertson of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

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

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give gems a larger and lighter surface area, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping removes the evidence of the theft. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as a city, and find someone to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for thieves to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for structures should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, said a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between morning hours local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In Paris, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and breached a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old structure had mostly focused on crowd control in recent years, and less on security.

The museum has an in-house team of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”