🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns 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 monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals 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 retail store thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, performed by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m 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 robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the items were to remain intact, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, especially given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, maybe by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Altering taken items by melting down or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping removes the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert 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 official review expected to be released soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“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 building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

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

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new methods with which to bypass protections. In Paris, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic structure had primarily centered on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an in-house team of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their mission is mostly to protect the collection from fires and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and funding, and currently the nation simply has no resources.”