Hammurabi's Code: Was It Just?

Hammurabi’s code is believed to be the first form of written law. It consists of a set of 282 laws written by Hammurabi, the king of Babylon circa 1792 BCE, that established a written social contract amongst the people of Babylonia. It was written on a stone stele that stands more than eight feet tall and weighs over 4 tons (doc A). According to the stele, Hammurabi was instructed to create the code by Shamash, the god of justice (doc B). However, it introduces conflicting ideas about justice that are arguable to this day. Were his rules unethical or his punishments too severe? Hammurabi’s code may be seen as unfair by today’s standards, but in solving matters that involve family, property, and health issues of his time, Hammurabi’s code was just because it utilizes negative reinforcement to implement positive results in society.

When it comes to property laws, I think that the laws to Hammurabi’s code was unjust. For example, in Document D Law 21, it states that: “If a man has broken through a wall [to rob] a house, they shall put him to death..., or hang him in the hole...” This law is unjust to the victim because if the accused is hung on the hole, than the victim will have to deal with a dead body hung on to the hole in the wall. This is completely unfair to the accused because although the accused tried to rob a house, he/she would be given a harsh punishment which is not only cruel but unnecessary. Law 23

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.

Laws that are related to crime usually end up with a very brutal, violent, and inhumane punishment. An example of these laws that have a brutal, violent, and inhumane consequent is law 22. “If fire breaks out in a house, and someone who comes to help put it out casts his eye about the property of the owner of the house and then steals the property of the master of the house (looting), he shall be thrown in the that self-same fire”. This law means that if a person comes to help extinguish the fire ends up stealing from the burning home, then that same man who came with good intentions of extinguishing the fire will be thrown into that same fire that he/she came to help put out. As you can see, the consequence for looting a house that is on fire is very violent. Another law that has a very brutal, violent, and inhumane consequence is law 109. “If a holy woman opens a tavern door or enters a tavern for a drink, she shall be burned to death.” In this law, it means that if a religious woman drinks alcohol then she will be burned to death for it is seen as a taboo in their religion. This law has a very violent, brutal, and inhumane punishment, as you can see.

Hammurabi had some unjust codes that were harsh and unfair. For example, if a man had broken into another man’s house and were to break through the wall, they would whether get put to death and pierced or hung where they had broken the wall [law 21]. This punishment seems really harsh and rude because they could’ve just paid a certain amount of money and fixed the wall or something. Personally, I think that Hammurabi could be a little less harsh on the laws and be nicer about them because I have noticed that more of the harsher punishment went toward the woman and not the men. Woman and men should be treated the same way no matter what. That’s

Hammurabi’s code was just because of its personal injury laws. In law 209 it states, “If a man strikes the daughter of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver.” (Doc E). This law is just because the free man is taking care of his daughter by making sure the man pays for what he caused. In law 213 it states, “If he has struck the slave-girl of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb,

Hammurabi’s code was a set of laws made by Hammurabi. They were the first written set of laws. There is a debate about if Hammurabi’s code was just or unjust. I think Hammurabi’s code was just. The codes were just, because it protected the weak, helped people in troubles, and scared people form breaking the codes.

Around 4,000 years ago Hammurabi’s code was created by Hammurabi the king of Babylonia with the goal of bringing justice to his kingdom. He even claimed that Shamash the god of justice commanded him to make these laws. Then his laws were carved into large stone’s called steles, written in the ancient cuneiform written, and then put up throughout all major communities of Babylonia. However, these ancient laws were not fair for everyone in his kingdom. Hammurabi’s Code was unjust because the laws pertaining to family life, property law, and personal injury were unfair.

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 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

The code of Hammurabi is the most remarkable and complete code of ancient law that we have. The code can be found on a stele, a stone slab usually to commemorate military victories in the ancient world. His code, a collection of 282 laws and standards, stipulated rules for commercial interactions and set fines and punishments to meet the requirements of justice. Most punishments resulting of death or loss of limb if a law was broken. The edicts ranged from family law to professional contracts and administrative law, often outlining different standards of justice for the three classes of Babylonian society. The Hammurabi Code was issued on the three classes of Babylonian Society, property owners, freemen and slaves. It was important as it organized the most civilized empire at that times , and Hammurabi made many copies of it and distributed them in the most important cities of the empire , so it represented a great progress to the human

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.

But King Hammurabi has decided that if the surgeon has already caused one death, his hands shall be cut off so he cannot cause another death. Think about the best doctors in the world- even they may not have been able to save some patients lives, but their hands are never cut off- they improve their medicines and processes and help more people. Another law that proves Hammurabi’s Code is unjust partially because of laws under Personal Injury is Law 196. Law 196 states,”If a man has knocked out the eye of a free man, his eye shall be knocked out.” This is a one for one situation in which the man will get his eye knocked out if he ever knocks out the eye of a free man. The free man whose eye first got knocked out should receive money for medical bills, not the other man’s eye knocked out. He has no use for the offenders knocked out eye, even though the punishment is fair enough for the act. Alternatively, Law 199,” If he

For example, here are some family laws that are unfair to the people of Babylonia. In law 195, [Doc. C], it states “If a son has struck his father, his hands shall be cut off.” I think that if

Hammurabi’s code was unjust because of multiple family laws. Just look at law 148 “If a man takes a wife, and she be seized by disease, if he then desire to take a second wife, he shall not put away his wife, who has been attacked by disease, but he shall keep her in the house which he has built and support her so long as she lives.”(doc C). As she lives Her dying days she would spend them watching her husband be happy with another woman.