🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, 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 an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of violent retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in older structures, and partly the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better comparisons 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 same year, the recent heist of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of thefts 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 stay whole, specialists 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 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 items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork confirming legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk 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, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be released next month pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing equipment and observing that surveillance were missing in multiple areas. But specialists say displaying precious items in historic buildings with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to bypass protections. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old building had mostly focused on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on security.

The museum has an in-house team of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and at present the nation lacks sufficient resources.”