🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of quick-hit 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 ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their security in recent years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have reduced spending on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our institutions 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 tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves dropped 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 the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent theft of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as quickly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the thieves would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been commissioned. “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 media. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary methods give stones a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon criticising “significant” and “persistent” delays in updating systems and observing that security cameras were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” said Erin Thompson. “They often have large accessible windows that allows 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 most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced surveillance systems or in-built vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old structure had mostly centered on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mostly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and currently the nation simply has no resources.”