🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Germany, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how at risk our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies 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 items were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to sell 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 Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the keeping and sale of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a bigger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like Israel, India or even as close as a city, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in updating equipment and observing that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say showing valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for criminals to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the thieves reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in the country about the historic building had mostly centered on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and currently France simply has no money.”