🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts 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 smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “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 security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement 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 theft of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as quickly as possible.”

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

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an accomplice telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “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 acquire these, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering taken items by melting down or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger 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, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say showing precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

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

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino 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 team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the collection from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and currently France simply has no resources.”