Hammurabi’s code
imagine you punch you father because you're mad then next thing you know your hands are cut off this was a rule of Hammurabi's code and in my opinion this is unfair. Hammurabi was the ruler of Babylonia in Mesopotamia in 1792 BCE and died in 1750 BCE and when he was ruling his 38th year he had made a total of 282 laws called Hammurabi’s Code and these were the very first laws ever made they are very famous laws but they are also famous for being very harsh. Hammurabi’s code wasn’t fair to all people because in some of the Laws if you do something to a slave you usually have to pay half the price of what would happen to a freeman.injustice can be found in the area of family Law like in Law 129 if a married lady is caught cheating she and the man she is cheating will be thrown
…show more content…
For example in Law 48 If a man borrowed money to plant his fields and a storm has flooded the field and carried away the crops in that year he does not have to pay back the crops (doc D). Another reason is in Law 21 if a man has broken through the wall to rob a house, they shall be put to death by being pierced or hanged by the hole they made (doc D). These examples show that Hammurabi’s Code was unjust because in Law 48 if a flood happens.And the crops are swept away from the flood, then that person doesn’t have to pay back what he payed for.This is really unfair because that means that the creditor has lost his seeds and get no money from what he deserves.Because that worked very hard for those seed’s.Now to the second reason now it may sound fair, but this law is really intense because the robber is being hanged or pierced.Instead this person should have been sent to prison or thrown out of Babylonia but not put to death. injustice can still be found in the area of personal law. For example in Law 196 If a man knocks the eye out of a free man, his eye shall be knocked out (doc E).Also in Law 199 If a man knocks the eye out of a free
Is Hammurabi’s Code just or unjust? Hammurabi ruled for 42 years. By his 38th year, he already had 282 laws. He ruled over most of Mesopotamia. He became king of a small city-state called Babylon. He wasn’t the first king to write in cuneiform for his laws.
Hammurabi’s code was based on the saying ‘an eye for an eye’. This means that the retribution for the crime would roughly fit the severity of the crime. For example, if someone poked someone’s eye out, someone would poke that someone’s eye out. I think this is fair because it doesn’t make sense any other way. For instance, if one was jailed ten years for a minor theft (a purse, a bike, etc.) and someone else was jailed ten years for a major theft (robbing the bank, stealing a valuable painting, etc.), that wouldn’t be reasonable. In Hammurabi’s ‘an eye for an eye’ theory, all the punishments are equal to the crime, which is very practical. Most of his laws are based on this.
Was Hammurabi’s code of laws just? Hammurabi was a king of a small city-state called Babylon in ancient Sumer until he united all of Mesopotamia under his rule. He named his empire Babylonia and is known as the Babylonian empire. He is best known for his code of laws, which followed an eye for an eye rule. The code was very detailed and applied to everyone. I think Hammurabi’s code was just and was pretty fair for his time.
His law code provides us with a rare insight into the daily life of ancient urban society. The Code has 282 specific legal codes. A few of the subjects carried out in the code are property and theft, economics and contracts, family and marriage, assault and personal injury, and responsibility and liability. Hammurabi’s code tells us a lot about early Mesopotamian law and culture. The code reveals a strict punishment, typically resulting in death, for individuals committing theft. Keeping to one’s own material possessions was extremely important. Furthermore, when a man alters the economic success of another individual, he must repay that person for their lost. Equality was extremely important when it came to following the law, so that others would not suffer financially as a result. For example, if a man cuts down a tree in another man’s orchard without the permission of the owner of the orchard, he shall weigh and deliver 30 shekels of silver. Surprisingly, Hammurabi’s Law also protected the right of woman more than I had anticipated when it pertained to marriage and family. Men were not favored more than their female counterparts. As well, assaulting another individual meant even more physical harm to the individual performing the act. These assault and personal injury reflected the philosophy, treat others the way you want to be treated. Finally, individuals
Examples of injustice can first be found in the area of Personal Law. The laws are: Law 199: " If he has knocked out the eye of a slave, he shall pay half his value" (Document E) andLaw 213: If he has struck the slave-girl of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay 2 shekels of silver. These examples show that Hammurabi's code was unjust because they showed discrimination between free men and slaves. If a free man was struck, the offender would
Hammurabi’s Code was not just b/c of it’s personal injury law. In Document E if you look law 196 and law 218, in those laws they both end in some type of physical punishment. Law 196 states, “If a man has knocked out the eye of a free man, his eye shall be knocked out.” That is a harsh punishment, the could have done it by accident, they should just put that man in some type of jail until the learns his lesson, if does decide to do it again the sould be in jail for the rest of life, so the people have a piece of mind knowing that he is no longer on the streets. In law 218 it says, “If a surgeon has operated with a bronze lancet on the body of a free man for a serious injury, and has caused his death, … his hands shall be cut off. ” I don't think that it was the doctor's fault, he did what he could. The patient did probably get their too late for his life to be saved. In both of these laws you can see that they are very harsh, even for their time, Hammurabi made sure that if you broke you would not do it again, hopefully. I hate that how a lot of Hammurabi's laws usually ended up in death, because
What is Justice? Justice can mean many things,but in this situation it means a fair treatment or a punishment for someone's actions they choose to make. The Hammurabi Code was made by the one and only Hammurabi!Hammurabi finished to Code of Laws after his 38th year of his rule.The code has 282 laws on it.He made the Code of Laws in Babylonian and he made it because the god (Shamash) told him to and he did it because so “the strong might not injure the weak,in order to protect the Widows and Orphans.Hammurabi's Code was mostly unfair because they treated the people and animals unfairly.
Hammurabi’s Code was unjust because of it’s family law. For example law 129 says “if a married lady is caught ( in adultery) with another man, they shall blind them and cast them into the water”( Doc C). That law is unjust because it will scare men and women and make them not want to associate with each other, causing trade to be low and people not wanting to work together. The laws might have been on a steele in the center of the city, but not everyone could read knowing about the laws. In Doc A Hammurabi says that the laws come from the god Shamash. “ They have given them the right to rule.” and in Doc B “ By the command of Shamash the great God and the judge of heaven and earth.” Hammurabi could be lying about getting the laws from the gods,
Hammurabi’s Code communicates the barbaric nature of Babylonian society to historians today. The Babylonians had a lack of jails and had excessive punishments. The punishment for an illegal act could be death, slavery, or amputation. Being jailed was not a punishment in Babylonia. An example of this injustice is the law that states, “If a man has broken into a house he shall be killed before the breach and buried there” (Hammurabi’s 21). If a man has stolen bread, he has no trial he is simply put to death. In today’s sophisticated world, we have jails to punish felons, so they have hope for redemption.
To begin, Hammurabi's Code threatened families. For example, In Law 129 if a married woman is caught cheating with another man her hand will be tied with rope and thrown into a river. Also, In Law 148 if a wife gets a disease the husband had to take care of her but he can remarry while he is still taking care of his wife. For instance, In law 195 If a son hits his own father the son´s hand shall but cut off. This shows, that
Can you imagine a world without laws and everyone lived in an uncivilized manner? If this scenario was real, life would be barbaric and the lack of justice would cause chaos. Before the Code of Hammurabi, crime was a personal matter to be dealt with. It was “mano y mano,” but in most cases that phrase meant perpetrator’s village verses victim’s village. Crime was not settled in a sense of organization, nor was correct punishment dealt out in the right way (Bertman). Since there was no organized justice before it, the Code of Hammurabi brought an organized system of justice, even though in recent times, historians consider the laws harsh.
The code of Hammurabi states an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth a life for a life. This law was written in 1750 B.C and even at that time the law was considered an extreme, but this is the 21st century and we consider ourselves civilized yet we live by such a barbaric code by enforcing the death penalty. In this day and age the death penalty is unnecessary because it costs too much to the state and to the taxpayer, it barbaric, and ineffective in deterring crime.
As most of the classmates mentioned, it was very surprising to read about the code of Hammurabi that shows the sternness of the code. While I was reading the lecture, I found one contradiction in the code of Hammurabi (at least I think). It is understandable that king Hammurabi made the code extremely stern so that people fear it and would not commit crimes. With his attempting on severe punishments for equality between an assailant and a victim, like an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, the code called right to be called the first punishment that fit the crime among equals. However, punishments depended on people’s social position. If a royal killed a slave, then the royal would not be executed but paying proper compensation to an owner
The Code of Hammurabi played a significant role in how women were treated, as well as their rights during Old Babylonian civilization. The Code of Hammurabi was created in 1780 B.C.E. and represents as the oldest written document in the development of human legislation. The “eye for an eye” principle comes from this code and states that if someone injures another person, then the person penalized to the same degree with the same action. Hammurabi’s code reflected three different classes which were; the
Justice is blind and with that, punishments do not change and do not become more lenient just because of someone’s socioeconomic status, gender and etcetera. The difference between retaliation and fairness is clear; vengeance has a certain sense of bitterness and anger involved and it is selfish while, justice is based on fairness and equality to the people. However, Hammurabi’s code treats men and women, and elites and commoners differently under the law, and unfortunately, some modern legal systems share this trait such as, the United States where the higher the socioeconomic status of someone, the more lenient the punishment, and in this way, our legal system is way too similar to Hammurabi’s code.