🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

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

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a Cartier store is more secure.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many western countries.

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

The theft of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to trade something as immediately identifiable 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 cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see paperwork confirming legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often hesitant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said 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 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 media. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a bigger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the evidence of the theft. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in historic buildings with a steady stream of visitors comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to secure,” said an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical 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 prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic structure had primarily centered on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to protect the artworks from blazes and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and currently France lacks sufficient money.”