🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe trends in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, the UK 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 expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a Cartier store is more secure.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also 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 shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better points of reference may be the 2019 burglary 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 2017 heist of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a series of robberies 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 stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give stones a bigger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as a city, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” delays in updating equipment and observing that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say showing precious items in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” said Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when security change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

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

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their mission is mostly to protect the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”