[SES1066]

While this 1650s painting may have features and subtext discernible to the experts, to me it appears that the unknown artist was also indulging in an exercise of reverse coloration. Looking from the bust line up and disregarding the hair, see how the pearls look and how the 'face paintings' differ. I get the feeling that this artist was using his skill to show the equivalent of a 'photo reversal'.

I also find the 1650s dating of interest as this was when Oliver Cromwell was ruling as 'Lord Protector' of England (1653-58). Given the strong Puritanism that prevailed after the regicide of Charles I in 1649, I wonder if this painting, with the gowns and pearls, was a dig against the Puritan fundamentalism that advocated simple dark clothing and decried adornment.

[Hot Tabasco]

Looks like tats were popular then also

[sumuam]

Fake.

[SauronOfMordor]

I’ll go with a simpler explanation than most on this thread.

The artist didn’t like women disfiguring their faces with “beauty patches” and was saying that they were making themselves look like African tribeswomen.

I feel similarly about young women today disfiguring their bodies with graffiti.

[kalee]

I thought it might be Dido and Elizabeth but it’s before their time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dido_Elizabeth_Belle

[BobL]

To me, it shows the corruption of the capitalist system, where humans are reduced to property and only by the grace of God is one born white. Therefore Communism is required to correct this injustice.

[MNDude]

BBC dramas has taught me that England was full of black kings, queens, lords and ladies during this time era. I am surprised this is rare.