Note 376 — Chapter II

Clavigero, calling it oblong, adopts Torquemada’s estimate—not Sahagun’s, as he pretends, which he never saw, and who gives no measurement of the building—for the length, and Gomara’s estimate, which is somewhat less, for the breadth. (Stor. del Messico, tom. ii. p. 28, nota.) As both his authorities make the building square, this spirit of accommodation is whimsical enough. Toribio, who did measure a teocalli of the usual construction in the town of Tenayuca, found it to be forty brazas, or two hundred and forty feet, square. (Hist. de los Ind., MS., Parte 1, cap. 12.) The great temple of Mexico was undoubtedly larger, and, in the want of better authorities, one may accept Torquemada, who makes it a little more than three hundred and sixty Toledan, equal to three hundred and eight French feet square. (Monarch. Ind., lib. 8, cap. 11.) How can M. de Humboldt speak of the “great concurrence of testimony” in regard to the dimensions of the temple? (Essai politique, tom. ii. p. 41.) No two authorities agree.