We all know that the Mona Lisa was made famous in large part due to its theft in 1911, and reappearance 2 years later leaning against a tree.

I am not entirely sure its been recovered.

I mean, its in the Louvre, people see it, and everyone knows there are other versions in other museums. I just don't think the one hanging in the Louvre now is the same one that was stolen in 1911. Bear with me for a bit, I know this will come across as a bit rambly.

In 1911, the art world was really small, and books on art were entirely in printed form. Kodak only made their popular huge boxy camera in 1888, and photography was a novelty that everyone must have realized was getting big. If people wanted to actually see a painting, they would still have to go themselves to a gallery. If across seas, that meant weeks in a ship since air travel didn't exist yet. I also could not source a photograph of the Mona Lisa before 1911 in the Louvre, and I strongly doubt they would have allowed photography in the museum back then.

But I did source Raphaels sketch, and he would have had to have seen it to make it.

http://monalisa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/09-ml-he-raphaelsketch-03-940x13185-730x1024.jpg

The version now in the Louvre looks like this:

http://www.louvre.fr/sites/default/files/imagecache/940x768/medias/medias_images/images/louvre-portrait-de-lisa-gherardini-epouse-de-francesco-del-giocondo-dite-monna-lisa-la-gioconda-ou-la-jocon.jpg

Do they even look similar? I am not a professional critic by any means, but it looks to me like the sketch Raphael made was a copy of this version of the Mona Lisa:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/Isleworthml.JPG/220px-Isleworthml.JPG

Notice how both have columns? Thats the Ilseworth Mona Lisa, shes as thin in that version as the completely verifiable Raphael sketch. Also, I should note, that version has been in a private collection for a hundred years before the theft. We can look it up easily now, but only serious art critics would have seen both in the past, and even then, it would have been only with their own eyes since no photographs of the Ilseworth version predate the theft that I am aware of.

We know Leonardo da Vinci had students, and that they made copies of his work, and we also know which ones are his since they all look similar.

https://www.leonardodavinci.net/images/gallery/the-annunciation.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/Leonardo_da_Vinci-_Saint_John_the_Baptist_C2RMF_retouched.jpg/791px-Leonardo_da_Vinci-_Saint_John_the_Baptist_C2RMF_retouched.jpg

Both of those are pretty subdued compared to this other version that looks different than all the others, and was likely a reproduction by a student:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/Gioconda%28copia_del_Museo_del_Prado_restaurada%29.jpg/153px-Gioconda%28copia_del_Museo_del_Prado_restaurada%29.jpg

The theft was done by a guy named Vincenzo Perugga, and his motive was to have it on display in Italy.

Does that sound reasonable?

Like what was the plan? To sneak art worth millions out of one museum, and into another without anyone noticing? And out of the goodness of his heart? Its not like another museum could start displaying known stolen art from a master without people asking questions.

It seems more likely that the Louvre knew that the sketch made by Raphael was from the Ilseworth copy, and the Leonardo original was in a private collection. They arranged to switch them, but some sort of miscommunication happened, and they couldn't. They waited for 2 years to "recover" the art they already had, and pinned the theft on a known art thief to not lose face.

Which sequence of events seems more plausible to you?