Arnolfini Portrait

Arnolfini Portrait - Jan Van Eyck


The Arnolfini Portrait by Jan Van Eyck is one of the most popular masterpieces of the National Gallery in London but was painted in Bruges, commissioned by rich merchants of fabrics in Lucca, in 1434. This small oil masterpiece, on an oak panel, has influenced painters and the history of art itself, from Velázquez to David Hockney. The portrait has become a symbol of marriage, but the identity of the couple and the meaning of the scene are still uncertain.

Cuniugi ArnolfiniVan Eyck's painting is also one of the most studied of all times. The context is that of Flanders, an area mainly located in the northern part of present-day Belgium, one of the richest areas of Europe in those years, with Bruges together with Florence, one of the richest cities in the world, thanks above all to a flourishing industrial and commercial activity. Only kings, noble high lineage nobility or very wealthy people, as wealthy merchants, could commission such a painting to an artist of the genre and Giovanni Arnolfini (who had established himself in northern Europe as agent of the Medici family) had these requirements.

People said that van Eyck was an alchemist, and no wonder: there is something magical, and not only in a symbolic sense, in this painting; the way he seems to act as a window on a real environment, first of all. This famous painting has always been a mysterious object for art historians who have tried to establish its context. There have been many classical interpretations, including Erwin Panofsky's analysis that the painting was a kind of legal document to testify to a marriage. It is well known, however, that the latter arguments were based on a study of the work, which has not yet been fully investigated. This is a painting in which every detail seems to tell us something. For example, is the little dog an emblem of lust? Does it mean the couple's desire to have a child in that big red bed, as art historian Craig Harbison claimed? Or is it the image of Christian fidelity? Did the woman allude to her desire for motherhood by holding and grouping her dress on her belly? Or is it just that, as you can see in other paintings painted by Van Eyck, the painter liked to paint women with large stomachs?

Testamento di Giovanni Arnolifini - Archivio di Stato LuccaThere is only one certainty: what is represented appears as a real world, with real people. The key to the image is the mirror on the wall. The mirror, so significantly placed between the couple, is the image of what this painting claims to be: a true reflection. The artist and Arnolfini were courtesans of the Duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, but how many of us know exactly who Philip the Good? This wealthy couple, the Arnolfini, obtained, through the portrait, what the pharaohs thought they could reach through mummification: the two have passed unscathed centuries, along with their dog, their beautiful clothes and oranges. The meaning of this painting is that wealth - the richness of assuming Van Eyck as a portraitist - can make immortality acquire, at least in art. I wonder why such a famous work is not commercially exploited by a city like Lucca, from where the Arnolfini came. Among other things, Arnolfini (who died on September 11,1472) ordered in his will (opened in Lucca on December 10,1474) that the executors would take care of the creation of a perennial benefit in exchange for the bequest, a daily mass in the Church of San Romano in Lucca (in theory Mass should be celebrated even today.... there was not a time limit in the will, but now in the beautiful building from the inside ba The chapter of the church had in dowry, to celebrate "ad infinitum" the masses in memory of Arnolfini, land property for 400 gold florins of Lucca, 357 large ducats and 8 bolognini. This was a very significant figure for the time (1).

Guglielmo Petroni, writer from Lucca (author of the Death of the river), wrote about the masterpiece by Jan van Eyck and Lucca: "Will those names still be familiar to every Lucchese today? Will those faces so much of our own faces meet them several times at the Via Fillungo walk? It will be that those two, with that domestic and refined air, around the middle of' 400, there in Bruges, beautifully integrated into the environment... in short, they had remained so Lucchese that even the environment full of Flemish symbols seems to be assimilated to the closed and silent intimacy of certain houses in Lucca... It will be what I don't know, but sure is that the two marriages for me are home... It will be what I don't know, but sure is that the two marriages are home to me." (2)

In Lucca there are still traces of the Arnolfini in a street, in the name of a palace and in the echo of a wealth that was.


How much can a picture be analysed?

This exceptional work lends itself, as we have seen, to more than one reading. What is immediately striking is her realism that borders on photographic perfection: the newlyweds have young faces (for the times) but at the same time intense, for the solemnity of the moment; their clothes are sumptuous, the woman's right hand is abandoned in complete confidence in that of her husband. The details are so refined that they have created a whole piece of literature about their meaning: the carpet, the dog, the hooves, the clogs, the oranges, the only candle on the chandelier, the rosary, the brush and above all the mirror, where you can see reflections of the wedding witnesses' shoulders that, placing the observer in the same position as the painter, they reproduce in a more complex perspective the entire setting. For the first time, a painter proposes a more complex representation of space: in the same image we can see the room from two points of view, that of the painter and that Dettaglio firma Van Eyck nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi Arnolfiniof the characters portrayed, opposite. This gives a 360° representation of space. In the mirror we see the two spouses of shoulders and, between them, we see two other figures: one of them is obviously the painter who is performing the portrait. Painter who places his signature in unusual form, writing, right above the mirror, "Johannes de eyck fuit hic 1434": Jan Van Eyck was here. This painting was long among the treasures of the King of Spain (the Netherlands became a Spanish province for 130 years), and must have been seen by Velazquez, who replicated the contrivance of the mirror in his famous Las Meninas painting, which can still be seen today at the Prado Museum in Madrid. Van Eyck was very interested in the effects of light: oil painting allowed him to represent all the details with great finesse in this painting, starting with the sparkling brass chandelier.

Let us now look at some interesting details of the picture together.

The couple

Among the foreign merchants who lived in the prosperous 15th century Bruges there were members of the Arnolfini family from Lucca. They combined trade with finance and were among the first business bankers. It has never been known for sure which Arnolfini was portrayed, and perhaps it will never be known with certainty. The most probable hypothesis is that it was Giovanni Arnolfini, who should have married Giovanna Cenami, (a daughter of another rich family from Lucca in 1426, who should be his wife in the portrait) and who could later be tied in a second wedding to another woman. However, there is no documentary evidence of an additional marriage. The most varied hypotheses have been made about this, including that the painting was conceived as a memorial to his dead wife. According to the researcher Margareth L. Kostner, an almost homonymous relative Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini was the character represented in the double portrait of Van Eyck together with Constanza Trenta, whom he married in 1426. For others, Arnolfini's wife would have been Flemish. Towards the end of this article I will speak to you about the thesis of a scholar from Lucca, Marco Paoli, according to whom the painting is a self-portrait of the painter himself and his wife.


Dettaglio vestito dama nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniJohn and his wife had no children registered. Was the portrait to be considered as a memorial to the consort, who died of childbirth? Artists loved to represent women in a pregnancy position, whether they were pregnant or not. Pregnancy, like fertility, is an essential quality in a wife. There are other symbols of fertility, from the red bed to the carpet - a rare and expensive commodity in northern Europe in the 15th century, associated with a childbirth room. In addition, the figure carved in the chair behind the woman is Santa Margherita, the patron saint of childbirth.

The bed

This bed is what guests would have expected to see in a reception room. It could not have been used to sleep, but implicitly implied that the landlord was of a sufficiently high status to exhibit possession as an ornament.

The candelabrum

Dettaglio Candelabro nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniThe candelabrum has only a lighted candle, which symbolizes the flame of love. The representation was a custom typical of Flanders, the fact of leaving a single lighted candle on the first day of the wedding. But it must also be remembered that a lighted candle is also always used in the Tabernacle of the church, symbol of the permanent presence of Christ.


Oranges on the table

Dettaglio arance nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniOranges were a rare delicacy at that time, imported from the hottest south. They were appreciated for their culinary properties and often added peel in the preparation of sauces, which animated the rigid Flemish winter. The fruit and orange blossom were symbols of love and marriage, and the doctors recommended oranges in order to avert the plague (the Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling with his famous book on vitamin C would come only 5 centuries later).

Sandals and carpet

Dettaglio sandali dama nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniDettaglio sandali dama nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniThe red sandals (on the floor) were a really fashionable element of a wealthy woman's outfit. Dyed leather was another luxury, with dark shades, the most difficult to achieve. With the embellishment of polished brass studs, these sandals had to be an expensive "status symbol". On the other hand, the sandals made of wood and leather in the foreground are for men, while the red ones in the second floor, at the foot of the bed, are for women. This type of hooves was the typical Dutch type of hoof of those who led a proba and laborious life and Van Eyck probably included them in his work because they contributed to give the impression of a familiar and intimate dimension (and therefore of marriage already happened).  The carpet next to the bed, coming from Anatolia, is very luxurious and expensive, another sign of the wealth and position reached by Arnolfini.


The clothes

Dettaglio vestito dama nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniBoth characters of this painting wear the products that have made Bruges the centre of a commercial empire: fur, silk, wool, linen, leather and gold. The wife's dress is surprisingly large (a replica made in 1997 by students at the Wimbledon School of Art in London required 35 metres of material! Mrs. Arnolfini was wrapped in squirrel fur, which the experts tell us was required to require up to 2,000 skins. The fur fur most expensive and prestigious at the time was sable fur, reserved for the royalty and aristocracy. Giovanni Arnolfini's Tabarro (the man-wheeled cloak) is wrapped in a marten fur, which with its plum shades was another affirmation of wealth, since dark dyes were the most expensive to produce.

The mirror

Dettaglio specchio nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniThe mirror provides a new subject, two more people entering the room. The Latin inscription above it, Johannes Van Eyck fuit hic (Jan Van Eyck was here), confirms the artist's presence in this invented room. The slightly convex circular surface was the only form available for glass mirrors that were a rare domestic element. Only a few privileged people in fact had the advantage of seeing their own faces.


Pearls and brush

Dettaglio rosario nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniThe string of amber beads to the left of the mirror is a "paternoster", a type of rosary that was produced in Bruges. Van Eyck was perhaps advertising to a local industry that exported via Arnolfini. The beads symbolized feminine piety and were a customary gift that a man gave to his bride. The brush, hanging on the right of the mirror, represents the tenacity and humility of Christ's mother, which suggests the Flemish tradition of showing biblical characters in a modern context.

The dog

Dettaglio del Cane nel dipinto Ritratto dei Coniugi ArnolfiniIt is a Brussels griffin, the descendant of a long lineage of Flanders' terriers reared for the capture of mice. The breed reached England in the 19th century and its characteristics are still carefully evaluated by the attentive lovers of the canine pedigree. The small dog symbolizes fidelity (the name of the dog Fido common dog originated from the Latin trusted,"trust").


The characters

Various different hypotheses have been made about the characters of Van Eyck's famous double portrait. In 1934 the German art historian, Erwing Panofsky (4), published an essay on the subject in which he claimed that the painting represented the private wedding ceremony between Giovanni di Arrigo Arnolfini and Giovanna Cenami. All the details of this masterpiece allude, again according to Panofsky, to the ritual of marriage in which Jan Van Eych had participated as a witness.

Other scholars have supported quite different theses. For example, the framework referred to a genuine business contract between two spouses. Others have argued that the painting was intended for Arnolfini di Lucca to highlight the great economic fortune achieved by their relative in Flanders. In 1990 Jacques Paviot, a French researcher, found in the Lille archive in French Flanders, a document according to which Giovanni Arnolfini and Cenami had married in 1447, that is six years after the death of Van Eyck and that therefore could not be identified with the characters of the painting.

Another researcher, Margareth L. Kostner in a 2003 essay (The Arnolfini double portrait: a simple solution) suggested that the man portrayed was a close relative of them, namely Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini represented with Costanza Trenta, whom he married in 1426, when the woman was just over 13 years old. Constance, however, to complicate things, according to a mother's document had died in 1433, a year before the painting was made. For Kostner, therefore, the work does not represent the bond of marriage, but it is a sort of memorial for the disappearance of Constance one year after his death.


Let's go back a little bit

Mercanti a BrugesThere were several members of this family of Lucca, the Arnolfini, in northern Europe at the beginning of the sixteenth century. In cities such as Paris and Bruges there were colonies of Italian merchant families in this period. These families were actively engaged in the trade in textiles and other luxury materials for the needs of the nobility of northern Europe. Many of these families were also involved in the banking sector. The historic Flemish historian Antonius Sanderus, in the seventeenth century, offers us a vision of the so-called Bourse, the Stock Exchange, or Bruges' financial district (the name Bag meant as Stock Exchange derives from a house where merchants gathered to bargain letters of credit, the house of the Van Bourse family).

Mercanti Medievali a BrugesThe dominant buildings were at that time in the Domus Florentinorum and Domus Genuensium, the Florentine and Genoese houses. The accounting records of the European standards of northern Europe had frequent records of loans granted by these Italian merchants to help sustain the liquid capital needs to support princely families. In Bruges there was a Giovanni di Arrigo Arnolfini born in Lucca in about 1400 who lived in the city since 1421. A voice in the Archive of Bruges recorded that on July 1 of that year John made a great sale of silks and hats. In 1423, Giovanni was engaged in operations with the Duke of Burgundy Philip the Good. That year there was a big payment to Arnolfini by the duke for a series of six tapestries with scenes of the Virgin Mary, destined as a gift to the pope. In another recording in 1446 there are traces of a loan from Giovanni Arnolfini to the Duke. Perhaps in exchange for the loan, Philip gave the merchant from Lucca the right to collect the tariffs on goods imported from England for a period of six years. This profitable privilege was then renewed for another six years. Meanwhile in Lucca, Aunt Ginevra Cavalcanti had married Lorenzo de Medici, brother of Cosimo de Medici called the old man. In 1461, John became a councillor and doughnut of the Duke, and was named a knight in 1462. Louis XI of France appointed Arnolfini as adviser and governor of finance of Normandy. John died in 1472 and was buried in the chapel of the Lucchese merchants at the Augustinian Church of Bruges.

Giovanni married his namesake Giovanna Cenami, the daughter of one of the most important families of Lucca in northern Europe. Giovanna's grandmother was the nephew of Dino Rapondi who together with his three brothers were close financial promoters and bankers for the Dukes Philip the Bold, John of Burgundy, and the already mentioned Philip the Good between the end of the fourteenth century and the beginning of the fifteenth century. In 1432, when the last of the four Rapondi brothers died, Philip the Good had a special mass celebrated for them. Marriage and alliances such as that between the Cenami and Rapondi families were not just private matters, with the future of family businesses indissolubly linked. For Giovanni Arnolfini, marrying a member of such an important family was undoubtedly a considerable boost to his financial fortunes.

We know that the couple died without children. However, they may have had children from previous unions, although there is no evidence of this. There are court documents that prove that John had an extra-coniugal relationship (when he was already widowed). In fact, in 1470, when Arnolfini was 70 years old, a very considerable age for the time, a woman brought him to court to have the jewels that John had given her back and then resumed her. The woman also tried to get a pension and the property of some houses in his name and promises to the lover.

Ritratto di Giovanni ArnolfiniFrom what has been said, we can venture a consideration. In the portrait of Arnolfini Spouses there is an invisible presence. Van Eyck draws attention to what cannot be shown directly, God, the greatest symbol in Christian Europe. Probably there is also another invisible presence, that is Philip the Good. Why?

It is unlikely that Arnolfini or Cenami could approach Jan Van Eyck directly to paint the double portrait. Since the latter was the court painter of Filippo il Buono. The Arnolfini or the Cenami would have had the Duke's permission to dispose of the Master. The painter's signature documents his role as a witness to the event and Van Eyck was a member of the ducal court as a representative of the Duke himself. Thus his signature bears with him both his personal testimony and the endorsement of the ducal. Do you not know exactly where did Duke Philip's commitment to the Arnolfini family come from: a previous promise, a service fee, a demonstration of esteem and affection? Whatever the answer, the painting can be seen as a precise statement of Arnolfini's belonging to the duke's narrow circle. After all, Arnolfini was so important in the ducal court of Bruges that Van Eyck painted another Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini in 1440 that he is now at the Gemäldegalerie in Berlin.

How did the painting get to the National Gallery in London?

Marghertia d'AustriaIn another document found in the State Archives of Lucca we find a Giovanni Arnolfini (a name but certainly relative of the other Giovanni), who had a bank in the city of Lyon, and who left considerable debts upon his death. Among these were those with a certain Giovanni Joffrey lord of Sallignon (3) who, with the subsequent descent into Italy of Louis XII (to avoid threatening in any way the independence of Lucca), was welded with 2500 gold shields in 1500. This could explain in part the subsequent alienation of the patrimony of the character portrayed with his wife by Van Eyck, including the painting itself and the fact that the Arnolfini of Lucca never came into possession of it.


The first references on the painting you know are in the inventories of Margherita d' Austria of 1516. The painting in 1523/24 was one of Margherita's properties in Mechelen, where the noble woman exercised her protection of the arts and sciences (under her protection was Erasmus of Rotterdam, among others).

Don Diego GuevaraTrusted sources establish that the painting was a gift to the regent of the Netherlands (Margherita) from Don Diego de Guevara, ambassador and prominent figure in the Habsburg court in both Spain and Northern Europe (the same object of a beautiful portrait of Michael Sittow also exhibited at the National Gallery of Art in London). The latter served four, perhaps five, successive Dukes of Burgundy, from the Valois to the Habsburgs, especially in the Netherlands. He was also a personal attendant of Emperor Charles V. He is remembered for being a significant art collector. We do not know how de Guevara had taken possession of Van Eyck's painting. The Spanish courtesan also owned paintings by Rogier van der Weyden and Hieronymus Bosch, which were then sold to Philip II of Spain and today at the Prado Museum.


In October 1555, as part of the agreements reached for the division of the Habsburg Empire following Charles V's decision to abdicate, the emperor transferred the sovereignty of the Netherlands to his son Philip II. At that point Margherita of Austria ended her regency. As a result of these developments, the Austrian princesses prepared themselves for Spain. When Margherita died in 1530, the painting was inherited by her nephew Maria of Hungary, who in 1556 went to live in Spain. Upon the death of this painting, the painting passed tRitratto delle Infante di Spagna Isabella e Catalinao Philip II. A painting by two of the young daughters of the King of Spain, the "Portrait of the Infants of Spain Isabella and Catalina", today at the Prado, commissioned by Philip is clearly a copy of the posture of the figures of Van Eyck's painting. Among other things, this "copy" was painted by a forgotten Italian painter, also mentioned in Giorgio Vasari's Lives and appreciated by Michelangelo, Sofonisba Anguissola da Cremona. In the inventory of Mary's property in 1556, the first quotation in Van Eyck's mirror is also noted. From this moment, the Arnolfini Portrait became part of the royal collection of Spain and remained there until at least 1789, when the painting was documented for the last time in the Royal Palace of Madrid.

It remains quite obscure how the painting was stolen from the Spanish Crown during the turbulent years of the Napoleonic Wars. The picture resurfaced somewhat in the Netherlands in 1815. Perhaps it was an exchange between the Bonaparte brothers, a Joseph who was King of Spain, and a Louis, who was King of Holland, put there by his emperor brother. A British army officer, Colonel James Hay, discovered the painting hanging on the wall in Brussels, where he was in convalescence after the Waterloo Battle. When he fully recovered, he bought the painting and took it to England where he tried to resell it to the English regent prince. Hay didn't succeed in his intent, so he left the work of van Eyck to a friend, who kept him hanging on a wall for years, while Hay continued his military career, especially abroad. Another theory, perhaps more probable, is undoubtedly the presence of Hay at the Battle of Vitoria (1813) in Spain, where a load of works of art was intercepted, of which King Giuseppe Bonaparte had appropriated himself and who was trying to get out of Spain. It may have been at that point that Hay secretly seized it, and then invented the next story and avoided possible future claims by Spain itself. Finally, on the advice of a restorer called Seguier, the National Gallery bought Van Eyck's masterpiece from Hay, who had meanwhile become general for 630 pounds. The market value is now between 28 million and 35 million, but perhaps a lot, much more, as we say in these cases, is priceless??. That is, it is impossible to make an estimate, to give a price, to a masterpiece of this kind.

And if those weren't the Arnolfini but Van Eyck and his wife?

In 2010 a book was published in which the scholar Marco Paoli, director of the State Library of Lucca, suggested and proposed a courageous thesis, out of the schemes on Bruges' painting: the spouses portrayed by Van Eyck might not be the Arnolfini, but the painter himself and his wife Margaretha (Jan Van Eyck at the conquest of the rose: the "Arnolfini" Wedding at the National Gallery in London. Pacini Fazi Editore).

The painting would have a precise purpose: to celebrate the birth of the first male son and love for his wife, with a clear inspiration to the Roman de la Rose, masterpiece of French medieval literature, well known in the court of Burgundy. The identification with the Arnolfini, according to Paoli, derives only from a linguistic assonance: that of Hernoult le fin or Arnoult Fin, the names that were given to the subject of the painting at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when the inventories were born, with the French handwriting of the surname Arnolfini ("Arnoulfin"). In 1857, two art historians proposed the recognition with an Arnolfini, one English and one Italian Joseph Archer Crowe and Giovanni Battista Cavalcaselle, who were based on the fact that in the 15th century the family of Lucca had been very active in the silk market of Bruges. For Paoli, no other evidence would ever have been found to confirm the hypothesis. Nor is there a document that attests to any contact of any kind between Van Eyck and the Arnolfini. The painting, then, would remain unusually in Flanders when both Arnolfini and Cenami had descendants in Lucca. According to Paoli, the protagonists of the painting had no Mediterranean traits, but Nordic traits.

As courageous as it may be and in its "revolutionary" way, I am not convinced of this hypothesis. The fact that the painting remained in its place of origin can be opposed to what we knew about the fact that the Arnolfini family, who had no children, had large debts pending shortly after the death of Giovanni and this could have given rise to the loss of part of the property, the one furthest from Lucca. On the northern traits or not of the characters, the thesis is a little bit softer. Even today, the descendants of the most diverse cultures that have followed each other in Italy often have "Nordic" traits rather than Mediterranean traits. Lucca was also a "Longobard"city, effective capital of the Lombard kingdom of Tuscia, to which also the last king of Lombard Italy, Desiderio, gave.

In any case, Paoli's thesis is certainly fascinating, almost heretical because, as the author admits, he destoricizes an icon of art. If it were taken for good reason his theory, the picture would meanwhile have to be renamed in another way. And even the history of Lucca itself would be affected (although most people in Lucca do not even know who Giovanni Arnolfini is). The curious and funny fact then is that to refute the Orthodox history of this painting is a very Lucchese.


But Paoli brings other clues in support of his thesis.

Petrus Christus - Sant'Eligio e i fidanzati del 1449Van Eyck's signature in the symbolic place of married life, according to the scholar, would have been unacceptable for any client of the time: it would have been a matter of giving observers the news that another man, the painter, had passed from that place. The subject of the painting would therefore be the painter himself: proud of the high social status achieved, he is a portrait of himself and his wife set in the bedroom, an environment where only he, a legitimate husband, could afford to write "Jan Van Eyck fu qui". Another indication would be the resemblance of the supposed Giovanna Cenami with the portrait of Margaretha Van Eyck in Bruges. As far as this last point is concerned, there is a painting inspired by Van Eyck, Sant' Eligio and the boyfriends (also known as Sant' Eligio in the workshop of a goldsmith) by Petrus Christus of 1449, painted 15 years after the first one. Of course the setting is not as intimate as the bedroom, but it's always a home place. In 15 years the fame of the painting was to have spread, so much so that it became a work of inspiration for other great painters of the time. But there is Ritratto di uomo con turbante rosso - Van Eyckno trace (or at least it has not yet been found) of the fact that Christus or someone else knew that Van Eyck's work was a self-portrait. That would certainly have been known. The artist who had died 8 years earlier would have no reason to hide him. Even the time spent had been so short that the memory of the events could not have been forgotten. Filippo il Buono himself - who had Van Eyck as a court painter - who died after several years, in 1467, never made any mention of this in his inventories or memories. What is certain is that Giovanni Arnolfini was among his most faithful subjects, allies, financiers and probably friends. As a further indication against Paoli's thesis, there is Van Eyck's painting (left) which is credited by many as a self-portrait of the painter Portrait of a man with a red turban (next to him) showing a man very different from the Portrait of Arnolfini's Spouses.

The mystery continues....


Di M. Serra per Informagiovani-Italia


1. Archivio di stato di Lucca

2. Il nome delle parole Rizzoli 1984

3. Archivio di Stato

4. Erwin Panofsky and The Arnolfini Portrait 1934


Copyright ©




Se questa pagina ti è stata utile offrici un: Paypal