Was it Just? “Cursed!” is what you'll hear if you decline the written rules of Hammurabi.400 years ago in 1754 Bce. A man named Hammurabi became king of a city called babylonia and made certain rules about family law, property law, and personal injury law and although they were laws, not all laws were fair.
To begin with, Hammurabi made a decision to write rules for his land.But were they just?let's answer that. According to Hammurabi's code document c law 129,”If a married lady is caught [in adultery] with another man they shall blind them and cast them into the water.” this proves This was unjust because what if the man didn't know she was married and still has to get drowned while being innocent. It's exaggerated to be punished by death for cheating because they shouldn't be punished for the way they are.
Another one of hammurabi's rules was document D law 23, “who has been robbed shall formally declare whatever he has lost before the god, and the city or district the robbery has been committed shall replace for him whatever he has lost if the robber is not caught”.
Instead of the community searching for the robber to keep their community safe they let the robber free and is preferring to take money from its people. Since everybody in the community is being forced to help, those …show more content…
For example law 148 in Hammurabi's code it says,”if a man has married a wife with a disease has seized her,he is determined to marry a second wife he shall not divorce the wife whom the disease has seised .she shall dwell in the house they have built together and he shall maintain her as long as she lives.”this proves that not all of hammurabi's laws were unfair,maintaining a wife for as LONG as she lives with a horrible disease will keep the ill wife happy as long as she lives. Furthermore,this law is fair because it shows that marriage is a life time
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
I feel as though they are fair because of the rules 23, 129, 196 and several documents that were found. In the family section Hammurabi’s code is just. It is fair because of laws 129, 148, 168, and Document C. Law 129 is: If a married woman is caught [in adultery] with another man, they shall bind them together. This law
Hammurabi’s code was not just because of the family law, property law, and personal-injury law. The family law, in Hammurabi’s code, was unfair because in the law 195 it states, “ If a son struck his father, his hands shall be cut off.” (Doc C) This is not just because, if someone struck their father in common era, they would probably only get grounded. Things back then were a lot harsher that they are now.
Hammurabi claimed that his laws were both just and helpful to a wide range of people, but the majority of the laws don’t support either of his claims. In the instance of many laws, he appears to be very drastic with his consequences. In one of his codes, he says that if a women is caught in adultery with another man, both people must be tied up and thrown into the water (doc C, law 129). The act of binding the two people together and drowning them is a very specific and extreme repercussion for cheating. Another example of Hammurabi’s unnecessary harshness, was the law stating that if a man has broken into another’s house he shall be put to death by piercing him or hanging him in the hole which he made in the house (doc D, law 21).
Based on what I read, according to these two laws, Hammurabi’s Code was too strict. As you can see, Hammurabi had harsh rules, instead of trying to fix things, he gave consequences. Additionally, it made people lose some kind of property. For example in Law 23, if a robbery has been made and the robber isn’t caught, the society has to give back the items. Also, in Law 48, if a man borrows money from another man for crops, and a natural disaster ruins the crops, the man doesn’t have to pay back for a while.
The definition of the word “just” is fair, therefore I will be explaining if I think the laws are fair or unfair. In my opinion, Hammurabi’s laws were unfair to the citizens of the civilization. The laws were very cruel, unnecessary, and very extra. In the following paragraphs, I will explain my reasoning for my thoughts on Hammurabi’s laws. Based on the information that I have read on
Hammurabi’s Code DBQ King Hammurabi’s rule began in the city of Babylon. He later then extended his control by taking over Larsa and Mari a large part of Mesopotamia. After expanding his land, Shamash, the god of justice presented him with a code of 232 laws (Doc A). These laws were then influenced throughout the community and were considered a part of the communities culture. I disagree with Hammurabi’s code because most laws were to cruel and targeted certain people.
King Hammurabi created a set of 282 laws, thousands of years ago in a city called Babylonia to give peace. I think Hammurabi’s Code wasn’t just because it hurt the families, it’s punishment for property was to harsh and unfair to other people, and it wasn’t fair to personal injury. First of all, Hammurabi’s Code hurt the family. For example, Document C mentioned in Law 129 that if a women cheated on another man they shall be bined and thrown into the ocean. Also, in Document C it mentioned in Law 195 that if a son struck his father his hands shall be cut of.
In document C, Law 129 talks about how if a married lady is caught cheating on her husband, she and the man she was cheating with, get tied together and thrown into the water. Hammurabi should want his people to feel safe and be with whoever they want to be with. The husband may get mad at the lady, but getting thrown into water and drowning is really harsh. The woman would be scared. In Law 195 it states, “If a son has struck his father, his hands shall be cut off.”
Some things we know about Hammurabi is that he was a king for 42 years! In addition to that he was a king of a city state in Mesopotamia called, Babylon. Something else about Hammurabi is that he took power in 1792 BCE. Hammurabi also developed a code totaling an astonishing 282 laws. My question I need to answer is, Was Hammurabi’s Code Fair?
Hammurabi's laws that were concerned with family, property, and injury were unfair. Hammurabi's laws that dealt with family were cruel and harsh. In law 129, it states that if a married woman is caught cheating, the woman and the other man will be tied together and would be drowned. Although, the man who was
With all of Hammurabi’s advancements did he really impact the world today? The Babylonian king Hammurabi, who expanded the city-state of Babylon across the Euphrates River, proclaimed one of the earliest and most complete ancient legal codes B.C. Hammurabi was the sixth king of the First Babylonian Dynasty, reigning from 1792 BC to 1750 BC. His father, Sin-Muballit, who abdicated due to failing health, preceded Hammurabi.
She shall dwell in the house they have built together, and he shall maintain her as long as she lives.” This is unjust because you should not leave your sick wife alone and marry another woman. Many people think king Hammurabi’s laws were just, but they were not just because of that evidence. Justice is not absolute in this because people worked hard to make a marriage,
Was Hammurabi’s code just? Nearly 4,000 years ago, a man named Hammurabi became king of a city state called babylon. Hammurabi made a very important code in 18th century B.C.E. Hammurabi made 282 laws and he made these codes to protect the weak and poor from the strong. There are areas of law where Hammurabi’s code can be shown to be both, just and unjust. These are Family Law, Property Law, and Personal Injury Law.
In law #129 it states, "If a man's wife be surprised with another man, both shall be tied and thrown into the water, but the husband may pardon his wife and the king his slaves." In law #141, the husband has the option to make her a servant if he doesn’t want to release her. I can see that women weren’t just wives but their husband’s property. Hammurabi made it clear, that wives had to be 100% faithful to their husband, which doesn’t sound like a bad thing, but it’s in a way where it showed women should only obey their husband. I believe that Hammurabi didn’t believe in “love” or relationship.
Hammurabi’s code gives judgements and consequences for certain crimes. The punishment for a crime depended on one’s social rank. There were essentially three classes; the priests and noble landlords, the freemen, and slaves. Each law illustrated the division in the societies social status. As a particular law read; “If a man has destroyed the eye of another free man, his own eye shall be destroyed.