🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing 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 observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is more secure.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their security in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent reason of being accessible institutions in older structures, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by a royal that the robbers left by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent theft of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from US mining museums.

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

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable 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 published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and sale of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed 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 robbery had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by melting down or reshaping does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released next month criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and observing that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which took place between morning hours local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in France about the historic structure had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on protection.

The museum has an in-house team of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”