🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who observe trends in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a series of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Germany, the UK and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering 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 crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

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

If the items were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard 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, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see paperwork confirming proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant 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 widely publicised, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the media. If you acquire these, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or reshaping does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be published next month criticising “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing systems and noting that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But security experts say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” said an art crime professor. “They often 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 proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when guards rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old building had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on protection.

The institution has an in-house brigade of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on government support and funding, and at present France simply has no resources.”