To What Extent Was Hammurabi's Code Just Dbq

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

One reason why Hammurabi’s code is unjust is that it doesn’t treat everyone the same. Law 196 states “If a man strikes the daughter of a free man, and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay ten shekels of silver”, while Law 199 states “If he has struck the slave-girl of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay two shekels of silver. This shows that the code thinks that free people are five times more valuable than slaves. In Document B, he says “that the strong may not injure the weak”. However, in truth, the strong (free men) are injuring the weak(slaves), because if someone wanted to hurt a pregnant women, they would have to pay one-fifth of the money that they would pay if they hurt a free pregnant woman if they hurt a slave-woman.

Hammurabi’s codes were just and sometimes unjust. They would have harsh punishments and sometimes not as harsh punishments. For example, Hammurabi would have harsh punishments like, blinding someone and throwing them in the water, or if someone were to rob some ones house and put a hole through the wall to get in they would whether get killed and pierced or hung in the hole in the wall that they created. Also he would have not as harsh punishments like, giving people money or cutting off their hands. Hammurabi had a lot harsher punishments for woman that did not obey the codes and not as harsh punishments for men that did not obey the laws.

Hammurabi’s code included some gruesome punishments, some that might be believed as unruly, but is still just. Hammurabi’s code was just in many ways pertaining to their time. These laws are not the oldest set, but they were possibly the most strict from the ancient world. The punishments for breaking some laws are different for the multiple classes on the social structure and genders. Also, during his time, Hammurabi was known more as a builder and conqueror than a law-giver. All in all, the laws abiding in Hammurabi’s code are just because of its personal injury and family laws.

To begin with, Hammurabi’s Code was just to the family. For example, in Law 148 it protects the wife from abandonment from which it is evidence that it protected the weak. Also, in Law 149 it teaches children obedience which it is not to struck their superior in that case their father. Based on what I read, the laws protected the weak in these scenarios. In addition, this shows that Hammurabi’s Laws were just to the family. As you can see,

A life for a life. King Hammurabi became the ruler of Babylon in 1792. Hammurabi had created 292 laws. He had a total of 3,500 lines of writing, covering both sides of the steele. I am going to be discussing, Is hammurabi's code just? Before we answer the question I will tell you what “just” means. Just simply means “fair”. I believe that hammurabi’s code was just. In this essay, I will be discussing hammurabi’s code being just. I will be giving reasons for hammurabi’s code being just.

How would people feel if they had to follow the laws of Hammurabi’s code? Hammurabi was the king of Babylonia. Hammurabi started being king around 3500 BCE, and Hammurabi made 282 laws. Hammurabi’s Code was unjust based on the evidence from the codes Personal law, Property law, and Family law. Was Hammurabi’s code just?

The Code of Hammurabi was a strict, harsh, and unequal way of punishment that focused on current attainable penalties for Mesopotamian society. The society wasn’t religious, they did not have any affiliations with spiritual beings, which is why punishments were needed for the specific moment

Hammurabi ruled the city of Babylon for 30 years, after many fights with other kings he became the ruler of most of Mesopotamia. By his 38th year of rule, Hammurabi had carved all of his 282 laws out onto steles. He made his laws to create order and fairness throughout Mesopotamia (BGE). But were his codes just or unjust? They were unjust, due to the cruel punishment that they provided for the laws on family, property, and personal injury.

The harsh punishments and that the people had no say in laws. The following are the reasons why Hammurabi's code was unjust. The first reason why Hammurabi's code was unjust is that of the harsh punishments. To begin the first reason of why Hammurabi's code was unjust was because of harsh punishments in the ancient times is given in Document C. It states that if a woman is caught (in adultery) with another man they will bind

Hammurabi’s Code: was it Just We have all heard questions and talk about new laws. But, have we ever really thought and talked about laws in the past. Such as Hammurabi's laws. Well we should and especially about Hammurabi the ancient ruler of Babylonia . Hammurabi was a ruler for ancient babylonia.

Tyler DuMond 7th Hour Hammurabi’s Code Was it Just? Spare the rod spoil the kingdom. This was taken to extreme in ancient Mesopotamia. Hammurabi became king in 1792 BCE.

Hammurabi’s Code : Was It Just?I think Hammurabi's Code was Unjust because of the Family Laws.(Doc A)Below the prologue closer to the base, are 282 laws organized by theme including family life and agriculture.this is unjust because not everyone knew how to read or write so they couldn’t know these laws.(Doc B)it says the strong may not injure the weak then why when the mother or the son if he hits the man they shall be put to death or get their hands cut off and things like that.(Doc C) law 129:if a married lady is caught with another man,they shall be put to death but this is unjust because maybe the man still loves her and doesn't want another wife and who will do all the wife's duties like clean the house take care of the kids and cook the

Imagine being expected to have a sibling, then a man beats on your mother, and the unborn baby dies. Does the man get any jail time? No, he just has to pay 10 shekels of silver. Imagine ridiculous punishments and laws like that from Hammurabi’s code still being used today. Hammurabi’s Code was definitely unjust; the laws are unfair to the accused, the victim, and to the society as a whole.