To What Extent Was The Code Of Hammurabi 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

Hammurabi's laws regarding family include many prime examples of how his code protects the weak (doc B). Foremost, a man cannot relinquish his dying wife, but instead must tend to her for as long as she lives (doc C, law 148). Additionally, a father cannot disinherit his son unless the son has committed a crime (doc C, law 168). Both laws are just in that they defend

The worst form of injustice is pretended justice. A man named Hammurabi was named king in 1792 BCE for the kingdom of Babylonia in Ancient Mesopotamia where he ruled for 42 years. In his 38th year of rule, he created 282 laws carved on a stele in cuneiform, after his thoughts on peace and justice increased. He called them, Hammurabi’s Code. The set of rules were there for everyone to follow, but was always being questioned for the justice of the 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.

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.

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’s code protected the weak. In law 148, it says that if man’s wife becomes ill, he can marry a new wife, but has to take care of the ill wife too. This protects the ill wife from being abandoned. In law 168, it says that if a man wants to disinherit his son it must go before a judge, and if a judge says that he can’t disinherit his son than he can’t disinherit him. This law protects the son. Hammurabi’s code

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

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 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

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'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

Law 195 states that if a son has struck his father, his hands shall be cut off. One way it's unjust is because that if he cuts his hands off then his dad will have to do all the yard work on his own. Also, how is the son going to eat with his hands cut off? Especially if they have a big family. This is one law that supports my reason for why King Hammurabi Laws were unjust.

Circa 1754 B.C.E., the king of the Babylonian Empire,Hammurabi, ruled for about 42 years and in those years, he created a set of 282 laws and carved them into a large pillar like stone stele that was eight feet tall. But the real question is, was Hammurabi’s code just? Was it fair to the accused,the victim, and the general society? There are three areas of law were Hammurabi’s code can be shown to be just. These are Family law,Property law,and Personal injury law.