🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of violent retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into 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 crown of Empress Eugénie featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, performed by the worker the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” explained Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “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, particularly given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of famous works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping 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 valueless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the gems,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and observing that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” said an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

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

Contemporary structures are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or integrated 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 hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new methods with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in the country about the historic building had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to protect the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and at present France simply has no money.”