How King Hammurabi's Codes Were Unjust?

701 Words3 Pages
Visualize having a king who made 282 laws and if a person did not follow them they would get a really big punishment. That is how it was 4,000 years ago when a king named Hammurabi ruled in Babylon. He ruled Babylon for 42 years. King Hammurabi became king of Babylon in 1754 BCE. Were Hammurabi’s laws and codes fair and just? King Hammurabi’s codes were unjust because of the evidence found in the 282 laws. The codes that King Hammurabi wrote about were personal injury law, property law and family law.

First, there is evidence that the codes were unjust. The first, code was personal injury law. For example, in law 218 it states “If a surgeon has operated with a bronze lancet on a free man for a serious injury, and has caused a death, . . .his
…show more content…
The third code is family law. In law 195 it says, “If a son has struck his father, his hands shall be cut off.” The son should be punished however, cutting off his hands is very extreme. There is no age listed in this law and what if it was a child? In law 129 it also shows that the laws were unjust. Another reason is “If a married lady is caught [in adultery] with another man, they shall bind them and cast them into water.” This is also a very harsh punishment. The last law is law 148. The last reason is, “If a man has married a wife and a disease has seized her, if he is determined to marry a second wife, he shall marry her. He shall not divorce the wife whom the disease has seized. 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,

More about How King Hammurabi's Codes Were Unjust?

Open Document