🔗 Share this article

Breaking into 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 simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts who observe trends in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a Cartier store is more secure.”

A spate of violent jewellery shop thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the inherent reason of being accessible institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have reduced spending 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 horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – including jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally been compared with the 1911 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 jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous works of art and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of taken items is risky business 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 keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the media. 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 taken items by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary 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 coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” said 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 next month criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating equipment and noting that security cameras were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say showing precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for thieves to escape, 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 “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems 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 fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when security 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 gadgets that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and cut through a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in France about the historic structure had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and less on protection.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”