🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up 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, partly because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of robberies of collector items from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

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

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the keeping and selling of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. 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 acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a larger and lighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a leaked official review expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows 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 most solid protective measures for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “There should be several layers to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors 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 local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies 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 effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in the country about the historic building had primarily focused on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to protect the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and currently France lacks sufficient resources.”