Louvre Heist Shines Focus on Protection Concerns

Breaking into the world’s most-visited art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Specialists who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a pattern that has appeared over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their security in the past few years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have reduced spending on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive diadem once owned by a royal 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 same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the 2019 burglary of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum 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 thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the items were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an accomplice informing authorities to cash in a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft 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 buy this, 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 taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the proof of the theft. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that security cameras were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to secure,” said an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Detection devices can be hard 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 morning hours local time, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves 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 discussion in France about the historic building had mostly focused on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an in-house team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and currently France lacks sufficient resources.”