A commonly forwarded opinion is that the woman in this painting is probably Clara Peeters, making this a self portrait. However, Anna Bianco presents a contrary opinion: "Too many details in this painting have not been taken into consideration and consequently nobody had tried to divide for example the different interventions on the surface of this panel. This issue can open different questions, such as: “why did somebody turn a shell into a pocket mirror?” and consequently “who didit and why?”, “Who was Agnes Sorel, mentioned in the first written note about the painting?”. These, and the most important question “who painted this untraceable work of art?”, I will try to answer throughout these pages....The painting represents a woman sitting beside a table scattered with precious objects (golden goblet, coins, jewelery, etc.) who looks outside the painting with a melancholic expression. I was attracted by the opulence and the richness of the things represented on the table, but also by the composition itself, because, knowing already about Peeters' tiny self portraits in still lifes, I could not figure out a self portrait as large as this one. The fact that this painting was categorized as a self portrait raised many questions.... It is still impossible for me to confirm that it was Clara Peeters the artist conceiving this compositional scheme. For sure the artist composing this painting had to look back at her oeuvre, at her experience in still lifes representations and in particular at the vanitas. It is more likely, in my opinion, that this painting is a sort of homage to this great artist that so deeply influenced the Netherlandish tradition of vanitas pieces, including also some particular references to her likeness. (http://dare.uva.nl/cgi/arno/show.cgi?fid=205430) A more traditional interpretation: "A moment captured and stilled in the ever present flow of time. We have entered what appears to be a room belonging to a woman of means. By looking at the sumptuous items adorning the table we can see that she wants for nothing. Her expression is one of subtle annoyance, her head turned as if to say “what is so important as to interrupt me?” Her countenance also suggests that she is bored, almost sad, with all the pleasures of the world and yet she is still unsatisfied. The gold and jewels are strewn in an almost haphazard and carless manner; she has more than she needs. The light source seems to be coming off to the left perhaps from a window. When we consider that, maybe she hasn’t noticed us at all and she is gazing out the window in a melancholy way, bored with her trinkets and such. That light touches the gold and silver coins on the table and gives a gentle gleam to the candle holder that lies tipped onto its side. A vase of flowers adds some semblance of life to this work and brightens it slightly. If you will notice however, the flower on the far right of the arraignment. It is droopy and appears dead. This less than subtle symbolism is suggestive of the passage of time and the inevitable death of all living things, the woman in the picture included. Also of note, the women holds what appears to be a watch in her hands with its inevitable counting of precious hours, minutes and seconds. This is what is termed a Vanitas picture, which means a still life work, one dealing with the subject of death and the transitory nature of all earthly goods and delights. These transitory things are essentially empty, meaningless and when looked at in the greater scheme of things, hindrances to the purity of the spirit." More at https://beautyofbaroque.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/vanitas-by-clara-peeters-1610/