St Paul's Cathedral | London, UK

[Monkey]

St Paul's Cathedral
City of London


Height: 108m
Built: 1675-1708
Architect: Sir Christopher Wren

Links:
http://www.stpauls.co.uk
Skyscrapers.com listing (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=110679)
Virtual Tour (http://www.explore-stpauls.net/oct03/pano_pages.htm)
More images (http://linux.fjfi.cvut.cz/~pinus/bristol/london0301/stpauls/page_01.htm)
Old St Paul's (its previous incarnation) (http://vrcoll.fa.pitt.edu/medart/image/England/london/Old-Saint-Pauls/London-OSPaul.html)



History:

One of London’s oldest and most admired landmarks, St Paul’s Cathedral stands on Ludgate Hill in the City of London.

The present building dates from the 17th century and is London's fourth St Paul's Cathedral. Work commenced on the cathedral in 1675 on the orders of King Charles II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_England), and was completed on October 20, 1708, the 76th birthday of its architect, Sir Christopher Wren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Wren). It is built of Portland stone in a late Renaissance to Baroque style. Its impressive dome rises 108 metres (365 feet to the cross at its summit, i.e., one foot for each day of the year).

Within the cathedral are plaques, carvings, monuments and statues dedicated to a wide range of people. The bulk are related to the British military with several lists of servicemen who died in action - the most recent being the Gulf War. There are special monuments to Admiral Nelson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiral_Nelson) and to the Duke of Wellington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Wellesley%2C_1st_Duke_of_Wellington) in the south transept and north aisle, respectively. Also remembered are poets, painters, clergy and residents of the local parish. There are also lists of the Bishops and cathedral Deans for the last thousand years.

Ludgate Hill itself has long been associated with religion. It is believed that it was originally the site of an ancient megalith and then later a temple dedicated to the goddess Diana, in alignment with the Apollo Temple which once stood at Westminster.

A religious structure dedicated to Saint Paul has existed in London since 604AD. It has been damaged or destroyed on a number of occasions but has been doggedly rebuilt. The first cathedral was destroyed by fire in 675AD and the second was ransacked and then destroyed by Viking forces in 962AD. Old St Paul's (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=138268) was built by the Normans in their characteristic style from 1087 and it was completed in 1310. It was the largest church in England and the third largest in Europe. The church had the highest steeple in Europe (rising some 150m) until 1561 when it was destroyed by fire following a lightning strike and was never rebuilt; the building then slowly fell into general disrepair. The Norman structure otherwise survived until 1666 when, scheduled for demolition, it was completely destroyed in the Great Fire of London (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London) which swept through the city.

Commissioned by King Charles II, the task of designing a replacement structure was assigned to Christopher Wren in 1668 along with over fifty other churches. His first design in the shape of a Greek cross was rejected by the church as too radical in 1669 and his second proposal was turned down in 1673. To put an end to the wrangling, King Charles issued a warrant of approval to Wren, which gave him complete artistic license. His 'warrant' design was accepted in 1675 and building work began in June. The Wren cathedral was finally completed in 1710 (although the first service was held on December 2, 1697) and has survived until the present day, despite being targeted during the Blitz (it was struck by a bomb on October 9, 1940 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:StPaulsCathedral.jpg) but survived). Wren achieved a pleasing appearance for the dome by actually building three domes. The tall outer dome is non-structural but impressive to view. The lower inner dome provides an artistically balanced interior. Between the two is a structural cone which supports the apex structure and the outer dome panelling.

The cathedral has been the site for many famous funerals, including those of Horatio Nelson, the Duke of Wellington and Winston Churchill. The British Royal Family hold most of their important marriages, funerals and other religious and celebratory functions at Westminster Abbey, but St Paul's was used for the marriage of Charles, Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer.

Its sister cathedral is Westminster Abbey (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=136418), dedicated to St Peter.

The cathedral is open to the public, though there is a charge for non-worshipping visitors. In 2000, the cathedral began a major restoration programme, scheduled for completion in 2008, to celebrate the 300th anniversary of its opening. The restoration programme is expected to cost £40 million, and involves not only repair and cleaning of the building, but also improvement of visitor facilities - such as accessibility for the disabled, and provision of additional educational facilities.

St. Paul's Cathedral is the largest Protestant Cathedral in the world, with one of the largest Cathedral domes. It remained the tallest building in London from 1710 until 1962 - an amazing 252 years.


Sir Christopher Wren said "I'll dine with some men.
If anyone calls, tell them I'm designing St Pauls."
A Clerihew on Christopher Wren





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls14.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls1.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls2.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls3.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls4.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls5.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls6.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls7.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls13.jpg





http://www.skyscrapernews.com/st_pauls1-01.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls8.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls9.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls10.jpg





http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers2/stpauls11.jpg

[Ellatur]

the director of music for my church is from st paul's cathedral :)

[Philip Cronin]

I went to have a look at the progress with the exterior cleaning a few days ago. The West Front looked wonderful at dusk with the lighting subtlely coming into play.

There are two things I'd like to see done to enhance St Paul's. Firstly, and fairly cheaply, the installation of a barometer or astronomical clock or something of that sort in the North Tower to balance the clock. Secondly, and probably much more expensively, I'd love to see windows added to the bottom band of the dome that is bare apart from some little rectangular holes (you can see them in the first photo). I went to the St Paul's exhibition a year or so ago and there was an early drawing showing the proposed carved oval windows. I wonder why they were never installed? I know they wouldn't be of any practical use, but there are already larger discrepancies between the form and the function of the cathedral.

[Never]

Stunning, what a great thread. :)

10/10 ;)

[Munch]

http://www.carfree.com/design/pix/crch140londong_st-pauls.jpg

Successfully reinvented by the millenium bridge, awesome edition to London, really brings out the dome and frames the building.
http://www.christopherholt.com/wallpaper/wallpaper_millenium_bridge_night_01.jpg
http://www.extrospection.com/archives/2003/09/112_1281_London_Millennium_Bridge_By_Night.jpg

http://lola.isfoundhere.com/vignettes/blitz_london.JPG

[Tubeman]

Beautiful, iconic... St Paul's Cathedral IS London for many of us...

These are some of the most evocative images from London's history; St Paul's standing proud amdist an armageddon of destruction and fire:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/715000/images/_719230_blitz_300.jpg

http://homepage.eircom.net/~finnegam/war/images/blitz.3.gif

10/10

[Tazmaniadevil]

9.0 I'd rate it higher if the ceiling inside covered the whole church. It still looks like they only decorated part of the ceiling and left the rest blank to be completed later.
Great dome, though.

[Munch]

Tazmaniadevil, when did you visit??? St. Pauls has been indergoing extensive renovation for quite a while and won't be finished until end 2005 or early 2006. When i visited i noticed the undecorated parts but i was informed that the ceiling decor had been removed to be cleaned and restored. Maybe someone can confirm, but it is possible that what you saw if you visited within the last few years, was decor removed for restoration.
http://www.photo.net/philg/digiphotos/200102-e10-london/st-pauls-interior.half.jpg

[Matthieu]

It's a beautyfull building but I'm not a great fan of it. Actually, I'm simply not a fan of the neo-classical style and I simply prefer gothic and romanesque styles. It still get a 8 or 8,5 from me (still have to decide it).

[nick_taylor]

Exarchus - I think its age doesn't really classify it as neo-classicalist. I think its more within the later years of the Renaissance and Baroque architectural periods however. Afterall St Paul's was built between 1675-1708 and neo-classicalism did not become evident till the late 18th Century :)

Anyway I give it a 10++++ - better than any scraper in the world without any doubt and one of the greatest structures around to this date. Its iconic image as a monument to resisting Hitler & Co. during the Blitz gives it that little bit more of an importance and as Tubeman said - it is London.

[Matthieu]

But the Baroque and Rennaissance styles weren't really a success in England for everything that was religious. The protestants disliked this catholic habits to built ultra opulent churchs and I wouldn't define Saint Paul by baroque or rennaissance (Rennaissance isn't exactly an architectural style BTW).

[Philip Cronin]

But the Baroque and Rennaissance styles weren't really a success in England for everything that was religious. The protestants disliked this catholic habits to built ultra opulent churchs and I wouldn't define Saint Paul by baroque or rennaissance (Rennaissance isn't exactly an architectural style BTW).

Of course it's baroque. It's English Baroque so it's not the same as Italian or German Baroque, but is is baroque nonetheless.

[Matthieu]

Of course it's baroque. It's English Baroque so it's not the same as Italian or German Baroque, but is is baroque nonetheless.


The Angels on the roof aren't Baroque,

http://www.photo.net/philg/digiphotos/200102-e10-london/st-pauls-interior.half.jpg

In Baroque style, Angels are just winged heads. In the classical style they have a body and are neither male or femalle. There are other caracteristic but I can't see them on those pictures (like the virgin being represented on a globe or death being represented as violent and not peacefull). But maybe the English baroque isn't very Baroque at all. I would scan you a picture of Baroque angels but it's not the topic here and it would spam the thread. But if you're interested I can pm it.

[nick_taylor]

But if it aint Baroque or neo-classical then what is it then :)

[Matthieu]

Don't take my observations as a rule. Religious architecture is very complex but looking at this church I don't think it's a Baroque church but I would need to visit it completly to get an idea. It can be a transitory style, afterall sometimes the Durham Cathedral is refered as Norman Romanesque, sometime Norman Gothic so giving a style to a church isn't a simple thing.

Those are baroque angels:
http://premium.uploadit.org/LeChacal/Eglise_des_Templiers20.JPG

[Monkey]

Anyway I give it a 10++++ - better than any scraper in the world without any doubt and one of the greatest structures around to this date. Its iconic image as a monument to resisting Hitler & Co. during the Blitz gives it that little bit more of an importance and as Tubeman said - it is London.

Totally agree.

It's a truly magnificent building with a rich and fascinating history - and let's not forget the previous three versions which date back as far as the Dark Ages.

Arguably London's greatest landmark, it's rivalled only by St Stephen's Tower in terms of symbolism, grandeur and historical importance.

I give it 10/10 without hesitation.

[gothicform]

much of the interior was added by queen victoria who thought it was too staid inside, thats why the angels arent baroque.

[Matthieu]

much of the interior was added by queen victoria who thought it was too staid inside, thats why the angels arent baroque.


Thanks a lot, it explain a lot.

[zafiris]

Baroque architecture refers to the mixture of architecture styles and can be anything. It has nothing to do with angels and their wings. :)

[Matthieu]

Neo Baroque is a complete mixture (and it's not really a religious art),"Conventional" Baroque has a lot of rules (enough to write entire books over it) actually and there is complete different representation of the religious ideas in Baroque.

The main point of Baroque is to turn common religious representation in the other way, not to mix different architectural types at all.

Example:

Saint Marie: in classical, she has the feet over a crescent and she looks mostly seating or unconscious. In Baroque she is standing , with a snaked at her feet sometime she hold an apple or a sphere.

Saint Paul: He is bald in classical, in baroque he has a lot of hairs.

Demons: they look animals with the face of a pig in classical, in baroque they are humans with a wierd face.

Angels: body with wings in classical, winged heads in Baroque.

Little angels: Mostly without wings in classical, in baroque they are still those winged heads with the wings are dissemitrecals.

Death: quiet and safe in classical, violent and shoking in baroque.

Martyrs: Triomphant and quiet in classical, they express suffering in baroque, sometime they are even in extasy.

@Nick Taylor
Since I mentioned it, Neo Baroque could be a good description because it includes elements that aren't Baroque properly talking and that are more modern than the Baroque era.

[Philip Cronin]

Neo Baroque is a complete mixture (and it's not really a religious art),"Conventional" Baroque has a lot of rules (enough to write entire books over it) actually and there is complete different representation of the religious ideas in Baroque.

The main point of Baroque is to turn common religious representation in the other way, not to mix different architectural types at all.

Example:

Saint Marie: in classical, she has the feet over a crescent and she looks mostly seating or unconscious. In Baroque she is standing , with a snaked at her feet sometime she hold an apple or a sphere.

Saint Paul: He is bald in classical, in baroque he has a lot of hairs.

Demons: they look animals with the face of a pig in classical, in baroque they are humans with a wierd face.

Angels: body with wings in classical, winged heads in Baroque.

Little angels: Mostly without wings in classical, in baroque they are still those winged heads with the wings are dissemitrecals.

Death: quiet and safe in classical, violent and shoking in baroque.

Martyrs: Triomphant and quiet in classical, they express suffering in baroque, sometime they are even in extasy.

@Nick Taylor
Since I mentioned it, Neo Baroque could be a good description because it includes elements that aren't Baroque properly talking and that are more modern than the Baroque era.

Most of this is mere quibbling with is quite irrelevant to English Baroque. It is a simple matter of fact that in terms of English architectural history St Paul's is baroque. The baroque period in England was quite brief (for example I own a book called "English Country Houses - Baroque 1685-1715). Whether St Paul's meets Continental academic standards for baroque architecture is quite irrelevant. I don't suppose anyone in England cared then or now. In fact it is likely that if the builders of St Paul's had been aware of the conventions of religious representation in contemporary Catholic architecture, they would have taken pains to differ from them.

St Paul's may be a bit later than much continental baroque, but in England at least "neo-Baroque" refers to an early Twentieth Century revival. St Paul's is simply Baroque. If you think that English Baroque is incorrect and inferior that is a different debate.

[Matthieu]

Inferior isn't the term. But I wouldn't call it Baroque alone. Now I'll use English Baroque so, but it's a complete different style then. And Baroque alone shouldn't refer to English Baroque. Because the two style are obviously differents.

[nick_taylor]

So its baroque with an English twist and clearly not neo-classicalism

[Matthieu]

So its baroque with an English twist and clearly not neo-classicalism

Truer than true, considering it has been modified it's even harder to define it.

[Manuel]

A very well proportioned baroque cathedral. Tall, elegant and proud from the outside, a bit too complexified in the inside by the victorians.

Blend perfectly well with contemporary architecture, gives London a distinctive skyline.

[Monkey]

This was the previous version with a 150m spire, destroyed by a lightning strike in 1561.



http://www.skyscrapernews.com/old_stpauls.jpg

[Monkey]

http://vrcoll.fa.pitt.edu/medart/image/England/london/Old-Saint-Pauls/London-SSPaul-BondECA-004-s.jpg

[Phobos]

10/10
What an impressive dome!

[Monkey]

Viewed from Fleet Street


http://www.pbase.com/image/33220333.jpg

[vigo80]

Nice building - best in London 9.5

[Hardouin-Mansart]

Best in London, for sure!, could have been better built, YES!: take the ouija to contact Wren or just do some search on the internet... 6

[Monkey]

http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers/swissre_stpauls.jpg

[Hardouin-Mansart]

Would it be worth to have destroyed most gothic cathedrals to have plenty of Saint Paul's-looking temples all over Europe?

[Scarecrow]

St. Paul's Cathedral is the largest Protestant Cathedral in the world

No it isn't.

Great building though. 9/10

[Tazmaniadevil]

If any of you would like to compare interior architecture, visit the Brompton Oratory next to the Victoria and Albert Museum. It's very Italian baroque in design.

[Tazmaniadevil]

To Munch, thanks for the update on the ceiling decoration. But I noticed the unadorned section first way back in 1967, and it looked the same the last time I visited in the 90s.
Is the whole ceiling now fully decorated?

[NorthStar77]

The most jawdropping building I have ever seen in real life...10!

[DamienK]

9/10

[potto]

To Munch, thanks for the update on the ceiling decoration. But I noticed the unadorned section first way back in 1967, and it looked the same the last time I visited in the 90s.
Is the whole ceiling now fully decorated?

Wren wanted the interior to be architecturally pure and baroque. Not to be cluttered with decorations and statues (like in Westminster Abbey)! however Queen Victoria found it “most dreary, dingy and undevotional” (bless her!) and the Victorians added statues (not as crowded as Westminster Abbey by far so doesnt seem too bad) and put the gold leafing and mosaics around where the alter is. So there is no intention to decorate the entire interior in gold! It just wouldnt be right...

Wren was influenced heavily by the baroque period which was pretty much unknown in England at the time. He spent a lot of his time in Italy while he was preparing his ideas... St Pauls and the many churches he built in the City of London all have these baroque features...St Pauls is not as 'pure' as Wren wanted as the original design based on the greek cross which was deemed too modern and catholic for the people paying for the project at the time.

[Hardouin-Mansart]

Wren wanted the interior to be architecturally pure and baroque. Not to be cluttered with decorations and statues (like in Westminster Abbey)! however Queen Victoria found it “most dreary, dingy and undevotional” (bless her!) and the Victorians...

... shitted victorianism all over the place.

[potto]

well they only decorated the ceiling of the section containing the alter (sorry do not know its true terminology). Although you could argue it was rather crass and against the style of Architecture it does work at the level of drawing the eye down towards the far end and looks impressive when viewed from the back. Nearer you could say that it takes away from the impact of the inside of the dome, but the inside of the dome has such great impact (I still remember my first viewing) I would say that the victorians did minimal 'damage'.

[Monkey]

http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Winkel/swissre/012_30.jpg

[Monkey]

Pics by hkskyline

Looking west from the balcony on the dome:



http://img81.exs.cx/img81/87/dscn57204yd.jpg

[Monkey]

http://img81.exs.cx/img81/9177/dscn57158mf.jpg

[Monkey]

More pics by hkskyline.



http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4501.jpg





http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4502.jpg





http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4509.jpg





http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4512.jpg





http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4513.jpg





Notice the colour difference following some cleaning :
http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4519.jpg





From Millennium Bridge
http://www.thefilebin.com/userfiles/dublin2004/dec26/DSCN4526.jpg

[hkskyline]

I was about to post my photos in here! You're really quick :)

[Wicky]

Great cathedral. And thanks for the extensive information. 10/10.

[Fabio]

10/10


no comments

[Monkey]

http://www.orarium.com/images/london/48.jpg

[Arpels]

9/10

[Qualtagh]

I gave it 9. Has to look even better in real life.

[nukey]

If only the victorians hadnt added all those mosaics and the original Greek-cross plan hadnt been vetoed by the cardinals (or whatever they are called)!
http://allanmatthews.8m.com/london/stpauls/stpaul01.jpg

Nonetheless St Paul's is magnificent and personally I find that it packs a greater punch on an urban scale than does either the Pantheon in Paris or St Peter's in the Vatican. And I wouldnt realy call St Paul's baroque in the sense that it is more British mannerist... bending and playing with rules of decoration, syncopation and the like while not ignoring them. For me Hawksmoore and Vanbrugh were more definitively British Baroque in that they broke free of the Renaissance paradigms and began forming a new more eclectic architecture- entirely different from Roman, Venetian or Austrian Baroque (all different in their own ways). Thats the nice thing about the Baroque period... local personalities and mentalities realy began to appropriate the classical language to express their peculiarities, something that didnt happen while Vitruvius and his rules were unquestionable in the High Renaissance, and something that was smothered again during the wave that was neo-classicism.

[Turbosnail]

St Pauls has to get a 10. Apart from the fact it is a beautiful building in many different lights, it survived the blitz which has got to be worth a couple of bonus points!! The only slight frown is that English Heritage have used it to try and prevent skyscraper develpoment in the city, which is fair enough but they've probably fought the corner a bit too hard. I think it's the first ten I've given to any building :okay:

[brummad]

it does have the loudest tenor and bass section in any cathdral choir in the world lol.

as for the building love it love it love it....but i prefer westminster cathedral simply coz of its black interior roof...really adds to the atmosphere.

[Monkey]

Thanks to John for this pic.



http://img104.echo.cx/img104/7919/18989095qb.jpg

[lakegz]

one of my favorite structures ever. It looks so powerful but still so heavenly. I love those old images you guys scrounged up.

[Quezalcoatl26]

Decent enough 7.0/10.0

[Jaybird]

gorgeous, 10/10.

[forvine]

9.5/10

Very Majestic...

[SUNNY]

7/10

[Camaway]

It's nice, but lacks of originality, it's just another (albeit beautiful) me-too neoclassical building.

7.5

[Santa_Clause]

7.5/10

[Sinjin P.]

10/10

[wjfox]

10/10

The best building in London - and my personal favourite building in the world.


http://www.terminalterminus.co.uk/Photos/StPauls.jpg

[Vrysxy]

9/10

[Reflex]

9.5/10.

[El_Greco]

10.

[drfeelgood17]

10/10 - the most beautiful church in London

[Animo]

9/10

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

10/10 God phoned and he wants his house back :)

[weirdo]

grand. 10/10

[Benonie]

8,5/10

[Paulo2004]

10

[wjfox]

http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/5481/fleetstreettoday3vj.jpg

[wjfox]

A photograph from before World War 2:


http://web.ukonline.co.uk/john.marfleet/Beck/SCD.jpg

[marpa]

7,5/10

[wjfox]

7,5/10
Anything less than 9 is ridiculous imo.

[sohail style]

9/10

[NorthStar77]

Here is one I took last week
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v157/northstar77/London/Bilde119.jpg

[LordMarshall]

10/10

[Tiaren]

I'll give it 8/10, because St. Peter in Rome and the Cathedral of Cologne are much more stunning in my opinion. ;-)

[wjfox]

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/9505/stpauls3kb.jpg



http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/7453/sightline3tl.jpg



http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/8165/londonskylinebystaffh5gx.jpg



http://www.torrac.co.uk/forumimages/IMG_5400.JPG

[Mosaic]

10/10

[Medo]

10/10

[Pelha]

9/10 :)

[delmaule]

9/10

[crossbowman]

9.5/10

[gutooo]

10

[delmaule]

9/10

[mybeer]

The first time i've been there, i wasn't very impressed... meaby that's becouse i'm from Rome... but I like the dome and it's much better than the spire one.
8/10

[Kelsen]

9/10

[erbsenzaehler]

9/10

Pretty impressive, reminds me much to the Berlin Dome =)

[my19]

19/10!!!!!!

:lol:

10/10:)

[anm]

it is a magnificent building, and I'd give 10/10, except... there are many great buildings with this kind of generic dome, in Europe and in the US... from some angles it can be confused with the US capitol in Washington DC; in other words it lacks a little in the instant recognition department

9/10 nontheless

[SuomiPoika]

10

[Vlad000]

Good 9/10

[wjfox]

http://i18.tinypic.com/42nzl9s.jpg

[wjfox]

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/wjfox2005/City-Cruise.jpg

[W!CKED]

9/10

[Brightonboi]

10/10 !

[Sound.]

9.5/10

[LMCA1990]

10/10

[wjfox]

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/wjfox2005/London_general/city_of_london/StPauls-pinklighting.jpg

[Nikkodemo]

9/10

[Nielsiej13]

9/10, piece of historical art :)

[Overground]

I've been many a time. Love it. 10.

[Kawasaki_Kragujevac]

10/10
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Popiel]

9,5/10

[briker]

10

[MUNIZ - CORRETOR]

9/10

[Fred_]

09

[stasiua]

10/10