🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study trends in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, the UK and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have reduced spending on law enforcement and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by a royal that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“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 paperwork confirming proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice telling the police to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator 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 global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as a city, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be released soon pointing out “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

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

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be hard to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in France about the historic structure had primarily focused on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on security.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present France simply has no resources.”