🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of valuable gems or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how at risk our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – including jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the crown of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a multi-million pound 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 thefts of collector items from US mining museums.

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

If the artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see paperwork establishing proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner telling the police to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give gems a bigger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down 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 bring the items to places with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “significant” and “ongoing” delays in updating equipment and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” explained 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 can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when guards rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided thieves new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In Paris, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the historic building had mostly centered on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an in-house team of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and at present France lacks sufficient resources.”