Two tonnes vanished. The metal was the danger.
The bronze seemed too heavy to steal. A crane made its weight manageable, and its artistic value may not have mattered to the thieves.
Weight was not protection
On 15 December 2005, three men entered the Henry Moore Foundation’s grounds with two vehicles. A crane lifted Reclining Figure, the 1969–70 bronze identified as LH608, onto a truck. More than three metres long and weighing about 2.1 tonnes, the sculpture seemed an improbable target. ABC’s contemporary police appeal described CCTV evidence and a search involving specialist art investigators. The foundation had believed its sculptures’ mass discouraged thieves. Machinery defeated that assumption. [1]
Two incompatible prices
The fear was not simply that a collector might hide the bronze. The thieves could regard it as raw material. In May 2009, Le Journal des Arts reported the Hertfordshire police assessment: the sculpture had probably been melted after passing through scrap dealers and travelling east. Estimated proceeds were tiny beside its artistic value. The report described a probable fate; its confident headline does not turn that assessment into physical recovery. [2]
The loss that other returns cannot repair
Later thefts make identification essential. In 2013, the Museums Association placed the missing Reclining Figure alongside other Moore cases. A different work, Sundial 1965, had been stolen and recovered; Standing Figure in Scotland had just disappeared. Neither event supplies a happier ending for this bronze. Moore made many reclining figures, and bronzes can exist in multiple casts. Another sculpture’s photograph, or a recovered work by the same artist, cannot fill the place of this stolen object. [3]
Missing; police believed it destroyed
No recovery of the stolen cast is documented in these sources. In 2009, police assessed that it had probably been broken up and melted for scrap. That is an investigative conclusion, not a documented recovery of identifiable remains or a judicial finding presented here.
Sources checked 10 November 2026.Artwork Details & DocumentationIdentification, ownership history and supporting records
Individual artwork identification details have not yet been documented in this record. Missing specifications are not inferred from the photograph or report headline.
Not documented in this record: object type · materials & technique · measurements · inscriptions & markings · distinguishing features · artwork title · maker / attribution · creation date / period · subject.
Record sources
Identification details follow the Object ID categories where documented. Ownership history is recorded separately; this documentation is not an authentication or a certificate of ownership.
Sources & further reading
- ABC · Theft and police appeal, 18 December 2005 ↗
- Le Journal des Arts · Police assessment of probable destruction, 26 May 2009 ↗
- Museums Association · Sculpture thefts and the earlier Moore case, 15 October 2013 ↗
An original narrative synthesis of the sources above. Images depict the artworks; they are not reconstructions of the thefts.
