🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out 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 material value of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of violent retail store thefts mean that many stores have strengthened their security in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display 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 developed nations.

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

The theft of the objects – including jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the recent burglary of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the loss of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of taken items is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the media. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give stones a bigger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, melting down or reshaping removes the evidence of the theft. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India 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 protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon criticising “significant” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be building protection statutes 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. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, 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 before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic structure had mostly centered on visitor management in recent years, and less on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the artworks from fires and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”