This article explores how museum professionals experience and remember the long-term effects of a major museum theft, using the 2017 burglary at the University Museum of Bergen as a case study. While heritage crime research has traditionally focused on objects, sites, offenders, and legal responses, the experiences of those responsible for caring for collections have received limited attention. Drawing on theoretical perspectives from victimology, emotional labour, and ethics of care, the study explores how museum professionals experienced and continue to experience the burglary nearly a decade after the event. The research combines qualitative analysis of media coverage with reflective responses and discussions involving museum staff who were directly affected by the theft. The findings demonstrate that the burglary produced lasting emotions of sadness, anger, shame, guilt, and loss, extending far beyond material damage to the collection. Staff members frequently described feelings associated with moral responsibility, disrupted professional identity, and unresolved grief, while some also experienced forms of secondary victimisation arising from public speculation and perceived inadequacies in the legal response. The article argues that museum professionals should be recognised as victims of heritage crime alongside institutions and collections. By highlighting the human dimensions of cultural loss, it calls for more victim-centred approaches within heritage crime policy, museum practice, and future research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anna Wessman (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: