To What Extent Was Hammurabi's Code Was It Just Dbq

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

The Hammurabi Code of Laws is a set of rules enacted by the Babylonian King whose name was Hammurabi. The Babylonian King created a total of two-hundred eighty-two punishments that the citizens will receive if they do not abide by the laws that were given to them. The king ruled from 1792 BC to 1750 BC. The Hammurabi Code of Laws is very violent in terms of punishments. For example, one of the laws are “If anyone breaks into a house to steal, he will be put to death before that point of entry and be buried there (walled into the house)”. This is a clear example of how violent and inhumane the punishments of the Babylonians were, to us at least. This essay will be explaining a set of laws from the Hammurabi’s Code of 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.

In addition to these laws, Hammurabi’s laws were also gender biased .Laws for women were also unjust, gender biased and based on social classes. Women were not given an individual status according to these laws and also they weren’t allowed to trade and open their own business. Also, they did not have their individual rights. For instance, the law one hundred and twenty eight states that “ If a man take a woman to wife, but have no intercourse with her, this woman is no wife to him”. This law shows that the women were not treated equally and laws were based from the perspective of men and not the women. These laws also shows that how they were unjust to a women and suggest the social condition of them . Another law which states “If the "finger is pointed" at a man's wife about another man, but she is not caught sleeping with the other man, she shall jump into the river for her husband.” This was very wrong as it raised many questions about why only women were required to sacrifice and not men. Also, there was inequality between men and women as only men can choose their wife or perhaps buy her

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.

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.

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 law is said to be fair to everyone. The law is meant to be for everyone there. There was no set of rules for the rich or another set of the common these things did not happen. Or was there? The same crime but the consequences are the same for all the people. For an example if a commoner pokes another person’s eye out he, the commoner, would also have to have his eyes poked out. But if the situation was that a rich person who had poked out someone’s eye, he would then have to sell wife, daughter or son to a business for three years. Also if a slave was to poke out a commoner’s bull than the slave will have to poke out his own eyes too. So there was prejudice in the Hammurabi laws. The riches would get the easiest punishment, than the commoners and finally the slaves or homeless. As from the example all law was NOT meant for all the people if you were in a different class (the rich, the poor, slaves, commoner, royals and homeless) you would get different punishments for the crime or accident that you have committed.

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

I think some of these laws reflects no mercy on either part of the victim or the accuser. Some of

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.

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.

B) Hammurabi was warning people to follow all of his laws so that they wouldn't end up with harsh punishments. Hammurabi punished the society by destroying their most valuable possessions so that they would gain knowledge and never violate one of his laws once again. Hammurabi wanted the society to learn their lesson by receiving a curse upon their family, land, and troops. Hammurabi meant no harm to the innocent Mesopotamians. Like any law, people are meant to follow it. At school, work, communities, etc. there are rules and when somebody decides to violate them they find themself in many situations. In this case, when a man from the society didn’t follow one of Hammurabi’s laws, he would find himself in many consequences such as losing his most valuable possessions. “The carving at the top of the stele shows Hammurabi standing before Shamash, the god of justice, who is seated on his throne, Shamash is instructing Hammurabi on the law. Below the two figures is the Prologue, in which Hammurabi lists the names of the gods, saying that they have given him the right to rule. The Prologue, like the rest

Was Hammurabi’s Code Just? (By Sofia Bradburn) Imagine living during the 1750’s and living in Babylon. The king and ruler, Hammurabi had multiple laws to rule the society, to make sure the widows and orphans were safe and that the weak were protected from the strong. Some of these laws were harsh. Maybe too harsh.