Hammurabi Code 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.

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.

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.

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

Hammurabi’s code was fair because of the Family Laws. In law 148, it states “In a marriage if a spouse dies, then the remaining spouse remarries the living spouse the deceased must dwell in the house that they built

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.

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 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

The Law Code of Hammurabi is a native Babylonian text that served as the basic law code of society. The way of life was of the former Babylonians culture is totally different than what we are used to today. The text gives readers a vision of how ancient societies lived in these times. This law code gave society a diverse arrangement for citizens to follow. The social structure isn’t about wealth, they are judged by different standards (such as trial by ordeal). The husband is the dominant role of the house. The family structure is a patriarchal household and the power of the father is absolute. The Law Code of Hammurabi gives readers a clear thought of how unfair the earlier civilization of Babylonians existed through class structures, gender relations, and family structures.

Throughout time many civilizations and societies have come and gone. Every one of them was unique in their own way and had a different way of governing themselves. In this paper, I will be focusing on Hammurabi’s Code. Hammurabi’s Code is a series of laws that governed the Babylonian society back, when they were created, in 1780 BCE. The code was wrote by Hammurabi himself, back when he ruled the Empire of Babylon. The text itself explains why the code was created and why Hammurabi was chosen to write the code. The code then lists, in an organized fashion, all the rules that the society is to follow and what the punishments are if the rules are broken. Every rule is very specific about what is to happen if the rule has to be enforced. Hammurabi’s Code gives us an idea of how the justice system worked in the Babylonian society, how men and women in the society were treated, and how the religion was followed.

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.

In conclusion, Hammurabi’s Law Code was fundamental in elevating females place in society. Previously unprotected by any official laws, women were to some degree, treated as slaves. However, the implementation of Hammurabi’s Code of Laws, granted woman very important protections—if only a few—that greatly benefited the stability of their societal position. To summarize, the law code granted women few, but very monumental rights that consequently elevated their place in society as well as paving the way for future generations to attain further