🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of valuable gems or metals than the historical importance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

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

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the recent 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 quickly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of famous works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the media. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by melting down or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a bigger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to places with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released next month pointing out “significant” and “persistent” delays in updating equipment and noting that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” explained an art crime professor. “They often 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 best security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “It should include several layers to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was typical 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 security change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can notify more quickly and effectively, 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 vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in France about the historic structure had mostly focused on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The museum has an on-site team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to protect the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on government support and funding, and currently France simply has no money.”