🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent factor of being accessible institutions in older structures, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities 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 difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – including jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

“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. “It's impossible to trade something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

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

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to go public about the loss of famous works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and selling 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 conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice telling the police to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been commissioned. “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 get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, melting down or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as a city, and find someone to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released soon criticising “significant” and “ongoing” slow progress in updating equipment and observing that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid security systems for structures should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the historic structure had mostly focused on crowd control in the past decade, and less on security.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and currently the nation lacks sufficient resources.”