🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent 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 valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, Britain 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 Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their security in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” 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 items – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the worker the thief.

Better 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 same year, the recent heist of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” explained Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as quickly as possible.”

If the items 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 Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to announce publicly about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, maybe 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 comparable factors, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Stolen to order 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 bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping removes the evidence of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as nearby as a city, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released soon criticising “significant” and “persistent” delays in updating systems and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

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

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds 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. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards rotate and prior to the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given thieves new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old structure had mostly focused on visitor management in the past decade, and less on protection.

The institution has an in-house team of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the collection from fires and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”