🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest 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 appeared over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“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. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the in-built factor of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” said 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 robbery of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once possessed by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers left by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the same museum, performed by the worker the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of thefts 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, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly 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 striking pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of shame. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner telling the police to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to locations with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the museum, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “significant” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid protective measures for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their appearance. Detection devices can be hard to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, 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 before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new methods with which to bypass security measures. In Paris, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a glass pane with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic building had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and less on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks from fires and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on government support and funding, and at present France simply has no money.”