The ancient cities which have so far been excavated and the modern names of the sites are as follows:
| Nineveh | = | Kouyunjik. |
| Babylon | = | Birs Nimrûd. |
| Calah | = | Nimrûd. |
| Erech | = | Warka. |
| Ur of the Chaldees | = | Mukeyyer. |
| Ashur | = | Kalat Sherkât. |
| Dur Sarginu | = | Khorsabad. |
Let us take, for instance, the region in the valley near where the Upper Zab joins the main stream. We gather from the map published in 1867 by Place,[11] that Nimrûd, the modern Calah, is near the junction, while the mounds of Kouyunjik, Mosul, and Khorsabad, representing the ancient Dur Sarginu, are to the north (36° N. latitude). There are two other mounds shown on the map at Djigan and Tel Hakoab.
Now, by inspection it is quite clear that none of the mounds except that of Nimrûd lie east and west. It becomes important, therefore, to determine their orientation; but, alas! this is nearly impossible with the sole exception of Khorsabad, for no measures appear to have been made.
At first sight the matter seems more hopeful in the case of Khorsabad, for we have not only the plans of Place, but those of Botta and Flandin.[12] The plans seem oriented with care, so far as the existence of a compass direction is concerned—for that is present while it too often is lacking in such productions—but in neither series is it stated whether N. means true or magnetic north.
Both observers noted a well-marked temple facing N.E., and also an "observatory." About the temple there can be no mistake, for the fair-way of the light to it is carefully preserved, and there is a flight of wide steps on the north-east side of it.
Place gives the orientation 37° N. of E. in one plan and 39° in another. Botta and Flandin give 31½° in one plan and 32° in another! Now, the change in the magnetic variation between 1849 and 1867 will not explain this difference, nor indeed can it be accounted for by supposing that the magnetic north is in question in one set of plans and the true north in the other;[13] and it is clear that no perfectly certain conclusion can be arrived at till this work has been done over again. But it is known that M. Flandin was a skilled surveyor, and we have the remarkable fact, that if we take his value, we have the amplitude of the sun at the summer solstice in the latitude of Nineveh!
I certainly think the temple may be accepted as a solstitial solar temple provisionally; and if so, the question is raised whether the structures in Assyria, supposed to be oriented so that the angles face the cardinal points, are not all of them oriented to the sun at a solstice or to some other heavenly body. Certainly we must have more definite measures before the statement generally made can be accepted as final.
When we leave Assyria we find other countries, it is true still farther afield, in which the existence of solstitial temples of a great antiquity of foundation is fully recognised.
The great temple of the sun at Pekin is oriented to the winter solstice. The ceremonials which take place there are thus described by Edkins:—