🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of violent jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 heist of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of thefts of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

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

If the items were to stay whole, experts say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing proper ownership before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact 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. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been commissioned. “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 are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give stones a larger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Crucially, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as a city, and find someone to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in updating systems and observing that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have nice big street-facing 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 protective measures for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “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 raise alarm about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be reluctant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security rotate and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can notify more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old structure had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to protect the collection from fires and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present the nation simply has no money.”