🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the globe have reduced spending on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery 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 artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner informing authorities to collect a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft 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 newspapers. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by melting down or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a bigger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, dismantling or reshaping removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating systems and noting that security cameras were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say showing valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” explained Erin Thompson. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that allows for criminals to get away, 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 buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. 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 morning hours in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to bypass protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old structure had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and at present France simply has no money.”