🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take 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 Cartier store is more secure.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts mean that many stores have beefed up their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have reduced spending on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the recent heist of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the items were to stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems 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 items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see paperwork confirming proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“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, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an investigator 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 global news and in all the media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by melting down or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the day as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am 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. It’s often when security change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old structure had mostly focused on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and currently France simply has no money.”