🔗 Share this article

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

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: 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 protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent reason of being accessible institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the globe have cut back on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by a royal that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the same museum, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said Lynda Albertson of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

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

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give stones a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to cut out the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be published soon criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating equipment and noting that security cameras were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say showing valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” explained 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 are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for structures should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can notify more quickly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the thieves reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in France about the 232-year-old building had primarily focused on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the collection from fires and flooding. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and at present France simply has no resources.”