🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of violent retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums 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 Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once possessed by a royal that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies 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 devise a plan to conceal it, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective 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 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 family.”

Altering taken items by melting down or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a larger and lighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “significant” and “persistent” delays in updating equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” said an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for criminals to get away, 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 a security advisor. “There should be several layers to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

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

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the thieves 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 France about the historic building had primarily focused on crowd control in the past decade, and less on security.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and at present the nation simply has no money.”