🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city 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 international art crime, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has appeared over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the recent burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the keeping and sale of taken items is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering taken items by melting down or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as close as a city, and locate an expert 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 published next month pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in updating equipment and observing that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to secure,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can notify more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old building had mostly centered on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the collection from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and currently the nation lacks sufficient resources.”