🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts who observe trends in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, 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 world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – including jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by a royal that the robbers left by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, especially given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as art thefts 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 conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an art detective 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 global news 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 leave it to your family.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in updating systems and observing that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, 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”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be hard to fit to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent protections. 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.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the historic structure had primarily focused on crowd control in recent years, and less on security.

The museum has an on-site team of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the artworks from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”