🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their security 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 in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – including jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the recent burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the same year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented Lynda Albertson of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

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

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” 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 can't display it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “significant” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “Many of them have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, noted a security advisor. “It should include several layers to repel intruders.”

Modern buildings are fitted with advanced surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

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

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their mission is mostly to safeguard the collection from blazes and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”