🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the most recent in a series of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, continuing a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of violent 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. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, 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 law enforcement and the culture sector,” 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 theft of the objects – including jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant 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 2017 robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

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

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to trade something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, commented Lynda Albertson 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 sales venue would want to see documentation establishing legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of taken items is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an accomplice informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft 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 newspapers. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Modifying stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give gems 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 re-cutting eliminates the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be released next month criticising “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and noting that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing precious items in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves 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 best protective measures for buildings should be conceptualised “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s first-floor window with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the conversation in the country 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 brigade of about 50 full-time firefighters, but their mission is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on government support and money, and at present France simply has no money.”