🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent 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 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 steal expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of violent retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife 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, carried out by the worker the thief.

Better points of reference may be the recent theft of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts of collector items from US mining museums.

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

If the items were to remain intact, specialists 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 legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the cultural authorities has released images of the items. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the keeping and selling of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice telling the police to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Stolen to order 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 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.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give stones a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as nearby as a city, 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 state auditor report expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” delays in modernizing equipment and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “It should include several layers to deter attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors 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 extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to bypass protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in France about the 232-year-old structure had primarily focused on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The museum has an in-house team of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to protect the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and at present France simply has no resources.”