🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study patterns in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “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 stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have reduced spending on police and the arts funding,” 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 theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers left by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better comparisons may be the recent theft of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. These days, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an partner telling the police to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “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 leave it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by melting down or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping removes the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in updating equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to bypass protections. In the city, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in the country about the historic building had mostly focused on crowd control in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the collection from fires and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient resources.”