Code of Hammurabi

[Treize]

Can anyone give me some exclusive info about it that I can't find on wikipedia?

I have to do a presentation about it monday and I'm halfway done (it has to be 1 or 2 A4's).

And not purely from a historical point of view but also from an artistical point of view.

I also have to give my own opinion about this 'artwork'.

(About the german copy of the original!)

[Bovril]

Could you be a little more specific about the kind of info you want.



Presumably this is carving you are supposed to do an analysis of. It shows Hammurabi (often translitterated Hammurapi these days by accademics, BTW) on the left with his hand raised to his face in the manner generally used in Mesopotamian art to show obiesance. His dress is that of a high priest rather than a king. Seated on the right is either Marduk, the god of Babylon, and by this time generally regarded in Babylon as the head of the pantheon (he was originally probably a god of shepherds, but became a war god as Babylon emerged as a major city) or Shamash. The latter option is possible because of the sun rays emerging from his shoulder, and the fact Shamash was the god of justice, and patron deity of Lagash, where the stele may well come from. His dress is typical of a deity at the time. It may be worth noting that his head dress does not have horns, which in earlier periods it almost certainly would have. In his hand he holds what is probably a chisel, which may signify him giving authority to Hammurabi to write the laws. Note that the King and God occupy the same height in the image. This is unusual, since usually figures of higher stature such as gods were depicted larger, even if they were seated.

I couldtalk about the other aspects of the code if you like, but I dont know what you want to find out.

[Treize]

Thank you very much, maybe you could tell some nice facts about the inscription if you want?

[SonOfAlexander]

Huaamurabi... laws in ancient Babylon... 261 of them, but thats a mutliple of 13 which they believed was unlucky, so they copied one twice to make it 262... first time that all laws were written down in a single place or something...

That's whats comes to mind persoanlly, but Im guessing that many aspects are probably wrong

[DAVIDE]

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php...1276&Itemid=27

[Treize]

MAybe some examples of laws that are funny and stupid today?

[Raol Friedlander]

... stupid today?

It's not recommended to try the said out. Women innkeeper can be handsome.

(Codex Hammurapi §108) If a women innkeeper refuses to accept barley as the price of beer (and will only accept silver using a weight that dimishes the value in beer in relation to the value in barley), that innkeeper after being convicted will be thrown into the water.

[Treize]

I knew that one, but I need some more 4or 5 in total.

And how may laws are there, and how many are missing or unreadable?

[Raol Friedlander]

The modern editions divide the text in 282 paragraphs. They are based on the Louvre stela and a number of other texts. There are broken passages on the Louvre stele (columnes XVII-XXIII) which have been removed in antiquity. It is not possible to restore fully the lacking passages with the help of other texts. Aside from this, the text of the Codex Hammurapi is very well perserved as inscripts in stone often are. The Louvre stele presets the text in columnes and lines. The number of the columnes is 51 (with completements). The prologus reaches from columne I,1 to V,25, the laws from V,26 to XLVI,102, the epilogus from col. XLVII,1 to LI,91.

Codex Hammurapi § 104 If a merchant gives an agent grain, wool, oil, or other goods to sell, at each sale the agent returns to the merchant the silver (owned for the goods).

Codex Hammurapi § 127 If a man insults a priestess or the wife of another man and cannot prove his charge, they will flog him in the presence of the judges and shave half his hair off (as punishment).

Codex Hammurapi § 278 If a man buys a slave or a slave girl, and claims arise against him, the one who sold (the slave) will satisfy the claims.

Codex Hammurapi § 245 If somebody hires an ox and causes its death either by negligence or by beating, he replaces ox for ox to the owner of the ox.

(selected by accident)

[Bovril]

One interesting discussion to have about the code is what the laws are supposed to represent. Some say they are actual judgements given by Hammurabi, others that they are general guidlines for judges, some that they are propoganda to demonstrate Hammurabi's credentials as a giver of justice, others that they are an attempt to bring a standard set of punishments to a newly formed empire. Of course, all of these factors may be important. If you read any part of the code, read the prologue. t's the best way to get to grips with the ideological context.
The laws themselves deal with several main areas, including property rights, violent crime, kinship and the relationship between citizens and the state. There are some interesting discrepancies between the rights of different social positions. Sometimes punishments are harsher for commoners than nobles and for slaves than commoners, theft from a temple is regarded as far worse than theft from a private individual, crimes against parents are treated more harshly, etc.
One striking thing to a modern reader is the frenquency of the word iddak, which translates as 'he shall be killed'. The number of capital offenses has caused quite a few scholars to speculate that these sentences are not supposed to be followed, or may represent maximums.

[Raol Friedlander]

It's certainly a collection of regulations for an elite including their dependants and stands not completely isolated in the tradition of acts of legislations but the devil sits also here in the detail.

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

§ 1.

⁌ If a man bring an accusation against a man, and charge him with a (capital) crime, but cannot prove it, he, the accuser, shall be put to death.

Man that's hardcore stuff.

If a man, in a case (pending judgment), bear false (threatening) witness, or do not establish the testimony that he has given, if that case be a case involving life, that man shall be put to death.

Hammurabi was harsh but fair I suppose.

If it be a life (that is lost), the city and governor shall pay one mana of silver to his heirs.

Welfare

Another funny thing, if you notice pretty much all the laws got the word "he" in them.
Until you reach thing relating to wine and wine-selling.
And then we see

If a wine-seller do not receive grain as the price of drink, but if she receive money by the great stone, or make the measure for drink smaller than the measure for corn, they shall call that wine-seller to account, and they shall throw her into the water.

If outlaws collect in the house of a wine-seller, and she do not arrest these outlaws and bring them to the palace, that wine-seller shall be put to death.

So wine is a female occuptation back then ??

If a man force the (betrothed) wife of another who has not known a male and is living in her father’s house, and he lie in her bosom and they take him, that man shall be put to death and that woman shall go free.

Kinda interesting when you consider various islamic countries today and you see cases like this usually ends up with the female getting killed and the man either goes free or jail time.

If a man accuse his wife and she has not been taken in lying with another man, she shall take an oath in the name of god and she shall return to her house.

Easy way to make a divorce then.

If a man desert his city and flee and afterwards his wife enter into another house; if that man return and would take his wife, the wife of the fugitive shall not return to her husband because he hated his city and fled.

HA, take that coward.

If there were no marriage settlement, he shall give to her one mana of silver for a divorce.

If you gonna do it, do it properly.

If a man take a wife and that wife give a maid servant to her husband and she bear children; if that man set his face to take a concubine, they shall not countenance him. He may not take a concubine.

Kinda interesting that women had quite alot of rights in this period.
If you are a wife and you actually do your duty, the husband will pay hell and back if he ever cheats on her or mistreats her.

If a man take a wife and she bear him children and that woman die, her father may not lay claim to her dowry. Her dowry belongs to her children.

Nice way to prevent marriage for money I see.

If a father do not give a dowry to his daughter, a bride or devotee, after her father dies she shall receive as her share in the goods of her father’s house the portion of a son, and she shall enjoy it as long as she lives. After her (death) it belongs to her brothers.

In other words, give your daughter her dowry otherwise your sons will lose a share of their inheritance.

If a man strike a man’s daughter and bring about a miscarriage, he shall pay ten shekels of silver for her miscarriage.

If that woman die, they shall put his daughter to death.

But what if he doesn't have daughter ?
Do they wait until he does before punishing him ??

If a bull, when passing through the street, gore a man and bring about his death, this case has no penalty.

Really ??
Stay the hell away from bulls in that case.

If a man’s bull have been wont to gore and they have made known to him his habit of goring, and he have not protected his horns or have not tied him up, and that bull gore the son of a man and bring about his death, he shall pay one-half mana of silver.

Must say that they are awfully lenient towards bull owners.

[Raol Friedlander]

Welfare

1 Mina is about 1/2 kg. That is not little but not also not beyond good and evil in that context of elites. It should be considered that the amount of silver can also mean goods of any kind valuing the weight of the silver, e.g. barley.

Another funny thing, if you notice pretty much all the laws got the word "he" in them.
Until you reach thing relating to wine and wine-selling.

So wine is a female occuptation back then ??

Wine is not produced there at that time. The translation is not correct here, too. It should be beer. The paragraphs about the women innkeeper are §108 et seq. One aspect of them is the exchange ratio of crops, beer and silver, which is important in an economy that does not know real money but fixed exchange relations of goods mostely in relation to the weight of silver. The production and the distribution of beer and products of beer is handled by women and men.

Must say that they are awfully lenient towards bull owners.

The owners of bulls and bovines in general offer crucial services to the economy (we might say so today) because they breed and lend the draught animals for the tasks that come with the tillage. Farming was a large scale enterprise that made life possible the way people lived there at that time. There is some rationality behind the regulation, even if it may not appear on first look so.


@IPA35

For the art historical aspects, have a look into Louvre's online presentation (sub view the feature - it will take a few seconds before the speakers starts with her commentary). The screen of the commented presentation can be enlarged by left click if it appears too small to you:

http://www.louvre.fr/llv/dossiers/detail_oal.jsp?CONTENT%3C%3Ecnt_id=10134198673229909&CURRENT_LLV_OAL%3C%3Ecnt_id=10134198673229909&bmLocale=en

Take the Louvre stuff serious. It contains all you need tomorrow.

Bye and have fun!

[Treize]

Thanks, quite usefull.

I'll add extra info and some example.

[conon394]

Wine is not produced there at that time. The translation is not correct here, too. It should be beer

You may be correct on that the second point about translation - but Wine most certainly was produced at the time all over the ancient world.

Interestingly from curse tablets wine shop proprietors in Athens were often women ....