🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited museum in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is more secure.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their security in recent years, with security personnel on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in older structures, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into 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 eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that 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,” explained Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as quickly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the keeping and selling of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, maybe by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk 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. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give gems a bigger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as close as a city, and find someone to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in updating systems and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But security experts say showing valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” said an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The most solid protective measures for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be several layers to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Detection devices can be hard 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 timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old structure had mostly centered on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the collection from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and currently the nation simply has no resources.”