🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent heist 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 metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have reduced spending 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 difficult 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 a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the worker the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see paperwork confirming legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous works of art and would stay silent out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the theft. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to take the items to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to secure,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that allows 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 buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to deter intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that raise alarm about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

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

An author said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old building had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and less on security.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their mission is mostly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and currently France lacks sufficient money.”