[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Ironically, we have a less-varied diet here in the states today than we did at the turn of the twentieth century. We had a far more varied diet in fruits, vegetables and meats than we do now. This is not to say that we have access to less now than we did then, it just means that people are eating less of a variety now than they did then.

Of course, what we do eat, we have far more of on a per capita basis. But I daresay that the average Tenochitlan marketplace (that so impressed Cortez and his men) had far more of a variety of produce than does the modern supercenter.

[Question_Assumptions]

But I daresay that the average Tenochitlan marketplace (that so impressed Cortez and his men) had far more of a variety of produce than does the modern supercenter.

To be honest I'm skeptical of that claim and it's validity. You might want to take a look at what a modern supercenter in an ethnically diverse area has on it's shelves, even if most Americans don't eat much of it. No, you won't find insects or certain types of meat (e.g., dog) but you'll find food from around the globe and meats you wouldn't find in Tenochtitlan (e.g., deep sea fish, lobster, crab, lamb, beef, etc.)

Also bear in mind that you are comparing an entire capital city with a single store. Within about 15 minutes of my house, I can not only visit at least 4 different modern supercenters but (including a Wal-Mart that has foods not normally found in the Northeast) but I can also go to an Asian supermarkets filled with foods from East Asia (China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam), Indo-Pak supermarkets filled with foods from India, Pakistan, and the Middle East, and a host of smaller ethnic food stores that cater to ethnicities just as various Hispanic groups, Hungarians, Jews (German and Polish), and others. And that's not even touching on restaurants. So I'd happily compare the diversity of food available in a similar area around my house to the variety of food found in Tenochtitlan, particularly if we compare any single day to any other single day. And I live in the suburbs, not even a city. In New York City, the diversity of foods available in some areas is probably even higher.

I think you are still missing a key part of my point is that the variety and quantity they had was seasonal and the availability of meat protein wasn't as high or consistent. There is almost no such things as foods being "in season" in the United States anymore. One can get tomatos, bananas, corn, or whatever year round, fresh, frozen, or preserved, and there is never a shortage of meat. I should also point out that Tenochtitlan was a capital city, and the availability and variety of food there may have been about as representative of all of Mexico as the availability of diverse foods where I live probably doesn't represent what you'll find in rural Iowa.

Again, I am not claiming that people were starving or even malnourished. I am claiming that the proteins in their diet fell below the quantity needed to allow the people eating those diets to reach their full growth potential as children. And I'm not just talking about Aztec Mexico but parts of Asia, Europe, and the Middle East where the diet was not nearly as diverse as the capital city of the Aztecs. Were there places where the people got more than enough protein in premodern times to get tall? Of course. But if the Aztecs were so well fed, why did them men rarely grown taller than 5' 6" and why were the woman "delicately built" (to quote one web page) with an average height of 4' 8"? Do you claim it was genetic? And if it wasn't genetic or dietary, then what caused it in your opinion?