🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, 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 expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have reduced spending on law enforcement and the culture sector,” noted 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 objects – including necklaces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better comparisons may be the recent burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the same year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be published next month criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in updating systems and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” explained an art crime professor. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for thieves to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old structure had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an on-site team of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mostly to safeguard the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and at present the nation simply has no money.”