Hammurabi Code Dbq

Hammurabi’s code was made by a babylonian king named Hammurabi who wanted just for all in my opinion his law were just because they protected the weak, the injured, families and properties. For example in document C law 148 if a man has married a wife and she gets sick if he wants to married another woman he can but not divorce with the other one that is sick instead she has to stay with them for as she lives. Also if a father wants to disinherit his son he can't unless the son has committed any crimes. As you can see hammurabi’s code protected the families.

Hammurabi’s Code is just/unjust for 3 reasons: Family Law , Property Law , and Personal Injury Law.

Hammurabi’s code was unjust because of the family laws listed in the code. In the prologue of Hammurabi’s code Hammurabi states, “That the strong might not injure the weak, in order to protect the widows and orphans,” (Doc A). Law 129 of Hammurabi’s code states if a married woman is caught cheating on her husband with another man, they shall be tied together and thrown into the water (Doc C). This seems highly unfair to the woman because the woman is lower in the social structure of the city, thus making the woman a weaker party. Didn’t Hammurabi say that he would protect the weak? This does not seem like protection to me. Furthermore, there is another law Hammurabi passed that is unfair to the weaker party. Law 195, if a child has hit

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 Hammurabi’s Code was not just because all of his rules were very strict. For example in Document C If a woman was caught with another man then they shall be tied together and be drowned in a lake. Also if a son struck his dad his hands would be caught off. I think that these rules are too harsh because they all lead to death. Another example that Hammurabi's code was not just was that instead of killing a person he could just put the person in jail.

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.

Were these laws just? Was Hammurabi’s code just? Hammurabi’s code was not just because the laws didn’t protect all people equally, the punishments were too harsh, and Hammurabi’s laws may scare away people from his society. Looking at the evidence it states that punishments towards slaves are different than the punishments towards free men and women. Hammurabi’s code was unjust because the laws didn’t protect all people

Although most people in today’s society would argue that Hammurabi's Code was unjust; the laws were perfectly suited for the citizens of the Babylonian empire and provided an early form of insurance for stolen goods (doc D, law 21 & 23) and for unforeseeable circumstances in agriculture (doc D, law 48, 53 & 54). Hammurabi put these laws into place to benefit the “weak, the widowed and the orphaned” (doc B) . These laws were a reliable source to the Babylonian people becauses they were given to Hammurabi by Shamash, the god of justice (doc A). An example of how one of theses laws benefitted the weak can be found in (doc C, law 148), if a man’s wife is ill and he would like to marry another, he must continue to take care of her. Hammurabi’s code specifically spoke to justice that relates to

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

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

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

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.

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.