What Is Hammurabi's Code Was It Just Dbq

Hammurabi’s code: Was it Just?

You’ve just been convicted of assaulting your father and now you have a sentence, both of your hands cut off! Back in Hammurabi’s court, this would’ve been your harsh punishment. Hammurabi’s was ruling over one million people, and he needed to have order. So, he decided to make Hammurabi’s code with 282 laws organized by specific themes. Although a set of laws was needed, the severity of punishments in property and family laws sure outweighed any of the good laws he made. Hammurabi’s code was not just because of his family law. In law 129 it states “if a married lady is caught in adultery with another man, they shall bind them and cast them into the water” (Doc C) and that isn’t just because That’s not fair

In law 48 (Doc D) , it states “If a man has borrowed money to plant his fields and a storm has flooded his field or carried the crop, … in that year he does not have to pay his creditor.” Although the storm or flood is a natural occurrence, the creditor doesn’t deserve to have a punishment for something that he didn’t cause. Also, in the property Law (Doc D) law 23 states “If the robber is not caught, the man who has been robbed shall formally declare whatever he has lost before a god, and the city and the mayor in whose territory or district the robbery has been committed shall replace for him whatever he has lost.” I think this is unfair to the community because they shouldn’t have to replace something someone else committed. Also, in the first place there should be now robbers because if Hammurabi is trying to (in Doc B) “ Let no destruction befall my monument,” why is there any robbers or robbery committed in the first place? Also, in (Doc D) 53, 54 i’t states “If a man has opened his trench for irrigation and the waters have flooded a neighbor’s field, the man must restore the crop he has caused to be lost.” That is not just because what if the man accidently did it? He doesn’t deserve such a huge punishment because not only would he have to pay, there is a high chance he could be sold into slavery. I think a better punishment would be they share the man’s yard until the others man’s yard is back to normal. Sounds like these laws were not stable enough to rule