🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts 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 materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last decade 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 steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have reduced spending on police and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better points of reference may be the 2019 theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts 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 items were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a bigger and brighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the theft. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as close as a city, and find someone to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating equipment and observing that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy 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 most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors 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 decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in the country about the historic building had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an in-house team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mostly to safeguard the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”