🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who observe trends 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 centered more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, governments across the globe have cut back on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the recent theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of robberies 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 remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork confirming proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and selling of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice telling the police to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” 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 bequeath it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in updating equipment and observing that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But security experts say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress 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 protections. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old building had primarily focused on crowd control in the past decade, and less on security.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mostly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient resources.”