🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to take 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 better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the globe have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, 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 Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery 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,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as quickly as possible.”

If the items were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves 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 Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has released images of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely 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 media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting eliminates the evidence of the theft. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as nearby as a city, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be released soon criticising “significant” and “ongoing” delays in updating systems and observing that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for structures should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted a security advisor. “There should be several layers to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to bypass protections. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the historic building had mostly focused on crowd control in recent years, and less on protection.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about 50 full-time firefighters, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and at present France simply has no resources.”