Could you comment on the style of this painting and the status of the subject?
This is a typical portrait painted in colonial era North America. The style is clearly inspired by British trends at the time, but the execution suggests that the artist was self-taught. There weren't art schools in the North American colonies in the 18th century. Since there were few artists working in the British colonies, having a portrait painted was a special occasion. What do you think that says about the status of Mrs. Mumford?
I work in a historic mansion in which we have a copy of a John Wollaston painting of Martha Washington's children from her first marriage to Daniel Parke Custis. The painting is in a very similar style for the same reasons. So I am sure she held elevated status.
Can you tell me more about the clothing depicted here?
Her gown, with its lace decoration, and the pearls she's wearing, are both markers of wealth and status from the time. Whether she actually owned these objects, or was shown wearing them to portray a specific type of image to those who visited her home, is uncertain.
The description said that this was potentially "image enhanced." How?
At the time this painting was made, it was common for artists to paint portraits based, at least in part, on prints and reproductions of other paintings. The dress in particular is similar to the clothing in another portrait by the same painter, suggesting that he might have copied the dress for this portrait, rather than painting what the sitter was actually wearing! When we say "image enhanced" we mean that the image is possibly a composite from multiple references, rather than completely true to life.
Did the artist intend to make the subject appear more masculine?
No, they didn't. In fact, the painter was likely self taught, with the help of observation of other painting and print reproductions. That could explain why his style appears slightly unusual to you!