>>17952357 (OP)
>Is there even the slightest piece of historical evidence that pagans painted their faces like this 1000+ year ago?
"Yes".
The Romans described the pre-contact Britoners/Picts/Whoevers as tattooing themselves in garish patterns, images, and when they went to hunt or kill they would paint their bodies in a blue or green plant dye called woad. They did this because most of them fought naked and would use the paint as a form of rank/identification and as a sort of luck charm in battle.
From what I'm aware though, not enough has survived of that time period for us to really say anything more than the basics: isolated pagan European cultures were battered by Romans and then post-Roman European cultures were further molested by Christians. Everything we know about pagan Europe was written by either Romans or Christians and not the people themselves.
>that pic
Something intelligent I will say is they probably didn't paint themselves like that.
Going by Roman accounts, and what we know from Native Americans and South East Asian primitive, our 'primitive' preferences include: swirls, thick lines, half the face painted, around the lip or underneath the lip, but typically never religious symbols that would otherwise show up on something physical.