🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal expensive 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 nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better comparisons may be the recent burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the cultural authorities has released images of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance 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 Picasso, 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 dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “ongoing” slow progress in updating equipment and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can notify more quickly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new methods with which to bypass protections. In Paris, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the conversation in France about the historic building had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an in-house brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”