🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent 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 appeared over the last decade in Germany, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts mean that many stores have beefed up their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife 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 same museum, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” explained Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as quickly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would find it hard to sell them. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said Lynda Albertson of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, maybe by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give gems a bigger and lighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to cut out the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in updating systems and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid protective measures for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to deter intruders.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the day as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more quickly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the historic structure had mostly centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on protection.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and currently the nation simply has no resources.”