132 HISTORY OF MEXICO. 



1782, was IV Tochtli, &c. All the difficulty confifts in 

 finding a Mexican year the correfpondence of which with 

 a Chriftian year is abfolutely certain and indubitable ; 

 but we find this difficulty furmounted, by being allured 

 not lefs from the ancient pictures of the Indians than by 

 the teftimony of Acofta, Torquemada, Siguenza, Betan- 

 court, and Boturini, that the year 1519, in which the 

 Spaniards entered into Mexico, was I Acatl, and of con- 

 fequence that the year 1518 was XIII Tochtii, the year 

 15 1 7 XII Calli, &c. fo that there is no room for doubt of 

 the exactnefs of our table, put at the end of volume I. 

 refpetting the correfpondence of Mexican with Chriftian 

 years. Thofe authors who difagree with it, have erred 

 in their calculation, and contradicted themfelves. Betan- 

 coart, in order to make us comprehend the manner which 

 the Mexicans had of computing years, prefents us with 

 a table of Mexican years, contrafted with Chriftian years, 

 from the year 1663 unto 1688, but this table is errone- 

 ous from beginning to end ; for the author fuppofes the 

 year 1663 to have been the year I Tochtli, which is de- 

 monftrated to be falfe by the continuation of our table 

 to that year. He affirms that 15 19 was a fecular year; 

 by the admiffion of this error, his chronology cannot but 

 be falfe throughout. If the year 15 19 was I Acatl, as 

 he fuppofes, with other writers, we fhall find, by going 

 backwards in our table, that 1507 was not a fecular 

 year, but 1506 was. In order to confirm his chrono- 

 logy, he adduces the teftimony of his friend and fellow- 

 countryman Siguenza, who, he fays, found that the year 

 1684 had been IX Acatl. If this was the cafe, his cal- 

 culation would certainly be right ; but although we do 

 not doubt his veracity in the citation of Siguenza, we 

 have reafon to believe that this learned Mexican correct- 

 ed 



i 



