🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, the UK and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to steal 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 aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have cut back on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the worker the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the recent theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“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 struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, 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 released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see paperwork confirming legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to collect a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an investigator 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 media. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a larger and lighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be published next month pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in updating equipment and observing that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

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

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

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be hard to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

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

An author said the conversation in the country about the historic building had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and less on security.

The institution has an in-house team of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to protect the collection 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 political will and money, and at present France lacks sufficient resources.”