🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the inherent reason of being accessible institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums 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 crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the worker the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as quickly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern cutting techniques give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the theft. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as close as a city, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in updating systems and observing that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say showing precious items in historic buildings with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” 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 are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid protective measures for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of modern robberies, 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 effectively act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new methods with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old structure had mostly focused on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and currently France simply has no resources.”