🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take valuable jewellery are breaking into 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 spate of violent retail store thefts indicate that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – including necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the recent theft of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the same year, the recent heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said 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 private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value 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 bring the items to locations with diamond expertise like Israel, India or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a leaked official review expected to be released soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating systems and noting that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors stomp 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. It’s often when guards rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in France about the historic structure had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their mission is mostly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and at present France lacks sufficient money.”