**Picasso stole it**: Picasso was questioned in connection with the theft in 1911 because of his prior connection to Géry Pieret and to Iberian sculptures Pieret had stolen from the Louvre. He was not accused of stealing the Mona Lisa itself, was questioned and released, and had nothing to do with the theft.
**The theft made the Mona Lisa famous**: As discussed above, the painting was already recognized as a significant masterwork before 1911. The theft transformed its fame and dramatically expanded its audience but did not create its reputation from nothing.
**Peruggia was a noble patriot**: His stated motive — returning Italian art from Napoleonic theft — was based on a false history. The Mona Lisa was not taken by Napoleon. It had been in France since Leonardo brought it there in the sixteenth century. Peruggia’s attempt to sell the painting for 500,000 lire is documented. His patriotism was at least partly constructed retroactively.
**He worked alone**: Accounts differ on whether Peruggia had accomplices. Some sources mention Vincenzo and Michele Lancelotti, described as brothers who may have helped with the theft. This detail does not appear in all sources, and the specifics of any alleged accomplices’ roles in the events of August 21, 1911 are not established with the same documentary confidence as Peruggia’s own involvement.
Separating these myths from the documented record is part of what makes the case genuinely interesting. The Mona Lisa theft was a simple crime — planning, execution, concealment, attempted sale, capture — that became layered over with narrative accretions driven by its extraordinary cultural visibility. The reality is in many ways more interesting than the myths, precisely because it shows how a mundane series of decisions by an ordinary man produced consequences of extraordinary cultural magnitude.