🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of valuable gems or metals than the historical importance, continuing a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part 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 reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better points of reference may be the recent burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering taken items by melting down or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary methods give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be released next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

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

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

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old building had mostly focused on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on security.

The institution has an in-house brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and funding, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”