123 
Figure 8. Panorama of the mountains from Lecco (Italy) 
The purpose of this research was to investigate and to 
pursue studies and hypothesis regarding some questions 
about this panorama. For example, the point(s) of view of 
the panorama were localized with a lot of difficulties. The 
hypothesis that this panorama was obtained from 
successive surveys on the area is uncertain, because 
signs of any principal or secondary geodetic stations in 
Lecco were not found. 
Moreover the panorama points are out of the ability and 
the artistic taste of the author (the shades were obtained 
by the watercolor) and besides his knowledge of the area. 
These elements are important to identify the author. In 
fact references to this panorama were found in a lot of 
papers of Carlini written during the period of the Second 
Topographic Map of Lombardy, but the notes on the 
drawing don't seem to belong to him. 
In order to identify the author of this panorama, many 
documents of other important surveyors of that period 
were analyzed. In the books of geodetic measurements 
between 1803 and 1807, the name of the young 
engineering Giuseppe Bovara was many times repeated. 
His diary, recently found, confirms both his presence 
during the geodetic campaigns and his hard work made 
with the astronomers of Brera. In 1810, Bovara 
specialized in architecture in Rome. He also drew a Map 
of the Naples Gulf, showing his strong interest in the 
cartographic representation. After leaving Rome, he lived 
and worked in Lecco and in its neighborhood. Bovara was 
also a big friend of Carlini during all his life. 
Analyzing the panorama of Lecco, it seems clear that the 
notes have been written by Bovara, instead of by Carlini, 
and other coincidences (described later in the paper) 
confirm that Bovara was the author. 
Anyway there are some other questions to answer to, so 
the ancient drawing has been analyzed and compared to 
the modern photogrammetric survey. 
5. PRELIMINARY ANALISYS 
In order to find the point(s) of view, some tops of 
mountains and some places were recognized in the 
panorama and compared with the measurements made 
on the Topographic Map. The points were recognized 
using different kind of maps at different scales: the Map of 
Touring (scale 1:200.000), the Regional Technical Map of 
Lombardy (scale 1:10.000), the Thematic Map of Lecco 
District (scale 1:50.000) and, for the historical buildings in 
the city, the first Map of Italy (scale 1:100.000) realized by 
IGM in the 1888. 
In order to make a mathematical analysis, a reference 
system on the Regional Technical Map of Lombardy was 
assumed. The origin was placed in the intersection of the 
cartographic grid at the coordinates 5.078.000 m (North), 
1.531.000 m (East) of the sheet B4d4 Lecco (x grows 
towards West and y grows towards North). This reference 
system was used for the measurements made on the 
maps; on the contrary, the measurements on the 
panorama, were referred to the first top of the Mont. 
Barro, positioned in the left part of the panorama. 
The two measurements were compared using a least 
square linear regression between azimuth angles and 
linear distances: d = k+sQ, where d represents the 
horizontal distance measured on the panorama in mm 
and 0 the cartographic azimuth. Analogous considerations 
were made for the elevation angles a. The reference 
system for the elevation angles was the surface of the 
sea. As before, the measurements of the elevation angles 
from the map were compared to the vertical distances h 
measured on the panorama, according to the least square 
linear regression: h = k+sa. 
Changing the point of view, the residuals for 36 points, 
estimated using these relations, were obviously variable. 
In fact the correct localization of the some points on the 
panorama depended on the selection of the point station. 
The point of view placed in Lecco (near Belvedere Street) 
provided the least standard deviation. The optimal 
solution showed the point of view coordinates, in the local 
reference system: x = 911 m, y = 550 m., z = 230 m, the 
panorama scales for the azimuth angles: k = 12.1 mm, s = 
271 mm, the panorama scales for the elevation angles: k 
= 40.5 mm, 5 = 226.7 mm, and a standard deviation of 
17.1 mm. 
Notice that no points were rejected, because a robust 
down - weighting procedure for outlier identification was 
set up. Furthermore the preliminary information, 
concerning the elevation of the lake (and of the candidate 
point(s) of view), was introduced in the system with a very 
small weight. 
Observing the residuals, they had a systematic behavior. 
In fact the drawing was made on two papers and every 
paper seemed to have its own point station. Therefore 
analyzing separately the two parts of the drawing, two 
different points of view, which minimized the mathematical 
solution, were found. 
The first solution, obtained for the section with the Mont. 
Barro, using only 20 points, showed the point of view 
coordinates, in the local reference system: * = 860 m, y = 
696 m., z = 216 m, the panorama scales for the azimuth 
angles: k = 9.5 mm, s = 274.0 mm, the panorama scales 
for the elevation angles: k = 15.9 mm, s = 275.4 mm, and 
a standard deviation of 8.4 mm. The second solution, 
related to the section with the Mont. S. Martino, obtained 
with 16 points, showed the point of view coordinates, in 
the local reference system: x = 716 m.y = 184 m., z = 210 
m, the panorama scales for the azimuth angles: k = 21.5 
mm, s = 342.7 mm, the panorama scales for the elevation 
angles: k = 54.6 mm, 5 = 197.3 mm, and the same 
standard deviation, because the solution is unique. 
After this analysis, the great reduction of the standard 
deviation confirmed that the panorama was likely realized 
from two points of view in Lecco.