🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in the middle of the day, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study trends in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Germany, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal valuable jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items 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 artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the criminals would struggle 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 a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a plan to conceal it, maybe by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” 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 go to jail. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern cutting techniques give stones a bigger and lighter surface area, and older-style stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting removes the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the items to locations with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” delays in updating equipment and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” said an art crime professor. “Many of them have large accessible windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid security systems for buildings should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was typical 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 guards rotate and before 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 provided robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old building had primarily centered on crowd control in the past decade, and less on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and currently France lacks sufficient resources.”