Why Is Hammurabi Unjust

Hammurabi’s code could have been just in many different ways depending on the situation, but Hammurabi’s code also killed many innocent people! When Hammurabi made the laws, they were placed in the middle of the town, so the people knew about the laws and the consequences if they broke the laws. In Hammurabi’s words, he said: “ Hammurabi, the protecting king am I. … That the strong might not injure the weak, in order to protect the widows and orphans.” (Doc. B). He promised to protect the weak and Hammurabi did not keep his promise. Although he meant well, Some of the laws were unjust and unnecessary. Here is why Hammurabi’s code is unjust to the property laws and the personal injury law.

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 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.

The Law code of Hammurabi is an inscription of laws on a well preserved stele artifact. The Babylonian King Hammurabi included not only new laws but law codes from the Sumerians and Akkadians. Since Hammurabi included these ideas from previous codes this can prove that these laws were not only written but also enforced. The laws of Hammurabi have a common theme of solving problems with getting even or unjustly consequences so that they don’t go against his laws, the topics such as domestic situations, work relations, and exchange all exemplify this theme within their law.

To begin with, the family laws in Hammurabi’s code are usually pretty unfair in the way they handle family disputes. One example of this is shown in Law 195 when the Code states, “If a son has struck his father, his hands shall be cut off”(Document C). This is unfair because it treats the son as lesser than the father since he gets a worse punishment than the original offense. Which shows that this law is an unbalanced punishment for the offense. Another example of an unfair law pertaining to family manners is when law 168 states, “If a man has determined to disinherit his son and has declared before the judge, “‘I cut off my son,’ the judge shall inquire into the son’s past, and, if the son has not committed a grave misdemeanor…, the father shall not disinherit his son”(Document C). This shows how a law can take something that should be decided by an individual, but instead is taken into a decision by the

Way back in the ancient mesopotamia around 1800 BC arose a leader named Hammurabi. He created a set of laws called The Code of Hammurabi. The Code of Hammurabi was unfair. In Hammurabi’s laws, it says on code number 196, “ If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.” This rule is not fair. What if the man that you poked his eye out was trying to kill you and you did that in self defense? Also it would not be fair if it was an accident. This is not the only law that is very unfair. There are many others such as law 205, “If the slave of a freed man strike the body of a freed man, his ear shall be cut off.” This is why the Code of Hammurabi were very unfair.

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 Mesopotamian laws, in contrast, were hard and unfortunate, which were set by King Hammurabi himself during his long reign of Babylon. In Hammurabi's court, it did not matter if you were rich or poor, if you broke the law, and were found guilty, you would be punished and required to follow the laws and punishments that were clearly written in stone (the code of Hammurabi).

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

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.

An example of this is if a man has knocked out the eye of another man, his eye will be knocked out ( doc E, law 196). The code protected victims of floods that caused them to lose their crops and made it possible for them not to fall into debt (doc D, law 48). Over all the code fought secure rights amongst people and things out of their control. A document recording the statistical data that showed crime rates before and after the implementations of the Code would help to better analyze how much crime rates decreased. It is easy to think that some of Hammurabi’s laws were harsh, like having a curse put on you for not following the laws (doc B), being punished by death for adultery (doc C, law 129), or having your hand cut of for striking your father (doc C, law 195). But these laws were used to keep citizens subservient and show

Have you ever wondered what the consequences for cheating on your husband back in Babylonian times? Would the consequences be more, or less harsh than consequences in modern times? Hammurabi wrote laws, called Hammurabi’s Code for the people of Babylonia. For example, if a woman cheats on her husband, Hammurabi’s Code says that they shall be tied up, and thrown into the water. Hammurabi’s personal injury laws were just, because the people who did wrong deserve the punishments for their actions. His family laws are just as well, because again, the wrongdoers deserve punishment. Hammurabi wrote these laws to keep everything running smoothly, and to keep his city in order. After all, Hammurabi’s code was just, because

If your car was stolen and wrecked by a guy, you should get a new car and he shall be put to death in the car that he stole. Hammurabi, the King of Babylon, ruled part of Mesopotamia. He was given laws from shamash to put to order on the land he was ruling. The question I am going to answer is, Was hammurabi’s code just or unjust? The question is saying were the laws fair or not. I think the laws are unfair, so I will discuss how they are unfair. I will discuss in the other paragraphs my proven point about how they were unfair on some of the laws.

Hammurabi code was unjust because of its family laws. In law 168 if a man son arm has to be cut off why does get the son’s hand cut off when you guys don’t get along. When the father and son don’t have a great future the son’s arm get’s cut off. Unjust because it's not the kids fought that his father never spend time and if they didn't have a great past and i don't the hand to get cut off its should be the father because he didn’t spend time with his son. That i know it’s a law and if the son and the father didn’t spend time together and the son’s arm get’s cut off and don’t think that’s unfair to the son for his arm getting cut off and should cut the father arm off sept the son arm getting cut off. That it should be fair for the son to

With a screeching scream and a squirt of blood, the boy’s hands were cut off. The boy’s hands were cut off because he had hit after he was unhappy with him for not buying him a toy he wanted. The year was 1755 B.C.E, in the kingdom of Babylonia - ruled under the mighty King Hammurabi. If this was a punishment right now, you would think that it would be way too harsh and abnormal. However, this punishment was a real one - in ancient Babylonia. During the 38th year of King Hammurabi’s reign, he made a set of laws that were extremely fair for its time, but very harsh too. Hammurabi claimed that the laws would protect the weak. The question is, was it fair, and did it live up to Hammurabi’s claims? Well, we’re about to find out how it was. It was fair because of its family laws,