C in ] 
The distances between the antient mile-Hones are 
not liable to thefe obiedfions ; and if a fufficient num- 
ber of fuch as Hand neared; to Rome were carefully 
meafured, their authority would be confiderable. 
But I do not find that any are now Handing within 
thirty miles of that city, nor that any of thefe have 
been meafured, or even any in Italy ; and provincial 
meafures are not of equal authority. 
There is Hill another method, whereby we may 
difcover the meafure of the Roman foot ; which is, 
from the remains of the antient buildings now Hand- 
ing at Rome : and though many have made ufe of 
fome fingle parts of them for this purpofe, yet 
no one hath hitherto compared the meafures of the 
principal parts of any one of them with each other, 
which is the only way to difcover the meafure whereby 
a building was confiruCted. 
With this view, therefore, I Hiall carefully exa- 
mine the meafures of the buildings contained in that 
ineflimable treafury of antient Roman architecture, 
intituled, Les Edifices antiques de Rome, and pub- 
lifhed at Paris, by Monf. Defgodetz, in the year 
1682. 
In order to this, it will firfi be neceflary to afcer- 
tain the proportion of the Paris foot (the meafure ufed 
by this author) to fome known Englifh fiandard. 
The Paris foot is one fixth part of the toife in the 
Chatelet; which was renewed in the year 1668 (4), 
and the new Handard has continued in ufe ever fince. 
(4) See De la Hire’s Diflertation on the Roman Foot, in the 
Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences for the year 1714 ; where he 
gives an account of this renewal of the ftandard in the Chatelet. 
In 
