Comparison Between The Code Of Hammurabi And Hammurabi

At the time, it was cruel to give harsh punishments to the accused if he/she cause a minor problem and they don’t do anything to help the victim. The property laws are unnecessary to the accused and even if the accused did something on accident, they still maybe end up killing him/her. The personal injury laws don’t even help because the laws punishments are basically killing the accused or chopping off a body part. In that time, the people thought that these laws were fair, But all in all, this is why the laws in Hammurabi’s code were unjust to not only the victim and the accused, but to society as

Drowning, cutting off hands, and hangings were all punishments in Hammurabi’s code. Given to him by Shamash, the god of justice, the code was carved on a stone stele and consisted of 282 laws. The laws were just for Hammurabi’s time period, but they would not be considered just by today’s standards. Compared to people today, Hammurabi and his subjects have a more impulsive mindset; their society is adverse to the works of society today. In that case it is expected that certain components, like laws, will be viewed differently over time.

Hammurabi’s code dealing with personal injury laws are fair. In law 199, it declares “If he has knocked out the eye of a slave… he shall pay half his value.” I believe that law is just, because if a man knocks someone's eye out then they should pay half of his value. In law 215, it declares “If a surgeon has operated with a bronze lancet on the body of a free man… and saves the man’s life, he shall receive 10 shekels of silver.” I believe that law 215 is just because he took time and used is knowledge to work on the guy and he saved his life, then he should get something in

* Hammurabi produced the law codes called “Code of Hammurabi” in order to acquire order and welfare. As Hammurabi state in his prologue, “Right and Justice I established in the land, for the good of the people.” (prologue, Hammurabi’s Code)

Hammurabi’s Personal Injury law was unjust because If a man knocked out the eye of a free man, then his eye shall be knocked out. Another reason, If a man strikes the daughter of a free man, and she loses the fruit of her womb, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver. Some people may claim Hammurabi’s code was just but actually it's not just because If a surgeon has operated with a bronze lancet on a free men for a serious injury and caused his death, his hands shall be cut off. This is unjust because the surgeon was suppose to help the free man survive not cut his hands off when he is already dead.

The Code of Hammurabi is one of history’s oldest and best – preserved written law which appeared in Mesopotamia around 1760 BCE. “It consists of customary norms that were collected toward the end of his reign and inscribed on a diorite stela set up in Babylon's temple of Marduk, the god of Babylonia. The 282 chapters include economic provisions (prices, tariffs, trade, and commerce), family law (marriage and divorce), as well as criminal law (assault, theft) and civil law (slavery, debt). Penalties varied according to the status of the offenders and the circumstances of the offenses. ” These laws considered words which sent by the Sun god Shamash to Hammurabi. Therefore, people believed that as long as they obey the laws, then they obey the god’s words.

The “Code of Hammurabi” is considered to be one of the most valuable finds of human existence. In fact its very existence created the basis for the justice system we have come to rely on today. The creation of “the Code” was a tremendous achievement for not only Babylonian society but for the entire Mesopotamian region as King Hammurabi was ruler over all of that area. Its conception can be considered to be the first culmination of the laws of different regions into a single, logical text. Hammurabi wanted to be an efficient ruler and realized that this could be achieved through the use of a common set of laws which applied to all territories and all citizens who fell under his rule. This paper will discuss the Hammurabi Code and the

(2) (3). First of all, the biggest different between Hammurabi’s Code and the Sharia Laws are difference in term of geography and the time when they were introduced and applied. The Hammurabi’s Code was applied in around 1760 BC for 46 years by the Babylonian (Iraq in the modern day), when knowledge and intellectuality of people in that period of time still were very limited. Unlike Hammurabi’s Code, even the Sharia Law was created a long time ago but it has still being used quite popularly in the modern day. The Sharia Law has been used in many Islamic countries in the modern life and time when people’s knowledge is extraordinary and unlimited. However, having read these two laws, we have realized that there are many of similarities between Hammurabi’s Code and the Sharia Law, which prove Hammurabi’s Code in a way can be considered as a model of the modern day laws against the fact that the gap of time is over 3000 years (1). One interesting point is that people lived in 3000 years ago share the same view with people nowadays. General violations like stealing, lying, prostitution and murdering are punished harshly. Therefore, even though Hammurabi’s Code did not exactly resemble the modern-day Sharia laws, however it shared the same basis, which was to keep justice and legal rights of everyone in place and both against women harshly (2)

In 1750 B.C. a new king of babylonia arose by the name of Hammurabi. He continued his reign up until 1792 B.C. but most importantly his reign did not go unforgotten. During his reign he was in charge of giving punishments to the wrongdoings of his citizens. As he conquered other cities and his empire grew he saw the need to unify groups he controlled, he was concerned about keeping order in his kingdom. In order to achieve this goal, he needed one universal set of laws for all the people he conquered thus he created the Hammurabi code.

Hammurabi's code was just, because it protected people and was fair. For most of the 282 laws in hammurabi's code they were in the best interest of helping and protecting the week, sick, poor, and the vast majority of babylonia. The laws were mostly fair to the people because usually the punishment was something of equal or greater harm than which the crime was committed. The only concern of mine is how harsh some laws were, because the punishment was way worse than the crime, but it was in a good cause so if the punishment was not death that the criminal was taught a good lesson, and if it was death the people didn't have to worry about the criminal that was killed because the criminal would be dead.

Laws are usually inspired and taken from the common knowledge of the society, whether the common knowledge was good or bad it does not make a difference. To illustrate, common laws derive from ethical backgrounds passed through generation to generation, where they feel that these traditions are sacred, and they cannot change it, because they fear the resistance that might develop form that change. Similarly, any religion after certain time gets to change in the name of modernity and prestige. To explain more, Hammurabi

People often assume that kings always make laws that are right and just for all people, but if that is looked into, is it really true? Not necessarily, at least in the case of Hammurabi’s Code. Hammurabi was a king in Babylon during 1792 BCE who created 282 laws which were printed on a stele. These later became known as Hammurabi’s Code. Hammurabi’s Code was made by King Hammurabi who wanted ultimately to protect the weak- such as widows and orphans- from the strong, and who wanted fairness throughout his lands. So, was Hammurabi’s Code fair to all people? Hammurabi’s code was unjust because of evidence supported by laws about Personal Injury, Property, and Family.

Hammurabi proclaims himself as an agent of divine power by emphasizing himself as the "chosen one" sent by the gods to "rule the people and to bring help to the country". In the introduction, Hammurabi defines himself as "the exalted prince" chosen by the gods, Anu and Eli, to bring "justice" and peace to the land. Similarly, he repeatedly makes comments about himself as "the wise kind", "the king of justice", and the chief king over all other kings to introduce his title and position to govern the people. Additionally, Hammurabi frequently makes reference to his monument, which inscribed on it were his "weighty words" of wisdom. He proclaims his monument as a symbol of divine nature, like the Bible, which is dignified of being worshipped and respected.

From beginning to end, Hammurabi’s Law Code mentioned the divine right of the king to enact these laws and that the gods had ultimate interpretation in each case

Hammurabi was the sixth king of the first Amorite dynasty of Babylon. He supposedly ruled from 1792-1750 BC. During his rule, he wrote a code of law, which was the first to be translated from cuneiform. The code was written on several stone tablets so that all people could see them. It had a prologue, an epilogue, and 282 articles, and included rights for women, even though they didn't have as many rights as men did.