of
in
a
It
fol sun
The was
in
feet Ham his
enthu
thirty-
system
the
archae
con
and
excavat winter
his
taken,
the
His
bothered French
reliably Egyp
efface
science
selection
Koldewey
below
is
Elamite
eight
Nineveh
than
the
began,
of
be
later effacer
began
king
name.”
remains.
the The
greeted
of
in
been
new
edited,
to
Eastern the documents,
interested
it
the
would
Morgan,
only
Egyptologist
more
historians, in
Robert
some
nearly
own was
the not and
column Shamash,
antiquity.
of
de
selection ruins was Layard
in
legal
Near
Then
not
in
by who Elamite
Hammurabi,
began
his
the
where
stela
it
He
the
East,
from
off
name
the
ancient
translated,
early
Egyptology.
German
Henry
those
codes.
carved
American
reerected
about
discovery Jacques
of
Paris,
used
preclassic well. the of
space.
Near
basalt written
scholars
following
apparently
The
obviously
around
the
the
in
as
all and
carried
of
Eastern
new
excavate
but the
popularizer
that
has
the
finds
had Hammurabi
birth
probably
scholars, BREASTED of against Austen
a
blank
black
to
And was
1898.
other B.C.
script
a
a
been
the Ancient
and
Near
the clearly Each consensus
H.
in
Louvre
was of king
stela
which
Assyriologists,
Hammurabi,
and
so
effaced, archaeologist
1845.
1200
the only
began had
biblical
picture
receiving
that
the
of by scholarship
the
were
only languages or Babylon,
is mid-1920s.
community
in
It
1850s.
by
publicists
for
to
Among from
on
cuneiform
Elamite
king scholarly
[thereon]
as
the unearthed
about Botta
JAMES archaeologist
Age
Breasted
indeed
1840s French
what
Code
the
late
there
of
contracts
in
studied
the
Eastern the
ancient
of
taken
of
justice.
The well
Babylon
the
Nimrud growing
was the the
public.
the
Iran,
curses
convincing
of
of
Emile
a of
as
generation at
lines
at
a
in
in
code
was many in
English The
the
One a
Near
inscribed enthusiasm
Civilization,
by
Hammurabi’s
Susa.
Breasted.
god
name several
his Paul
of of
by
oniy
of
work
his
of
The solemn stela
and Susa
were
H.
substituted:
carving
fragments
the
name
and
at and but
exhaustively
containing
hundred. statement
was
1901—1902,
the
The
a
1841.
It
lowing scholar
excavations began
and
siastically deciphered
archaeology press,
ology
even
of ing
tall six relief
god
queror Shutruk-Nahhunte,
capital by
“my murabi’s never
publicized. was
tian
constructing Conquest reflects is James age, a of 15 in in of to to his the He the the the the low Sar with 2200 with years chief Amo are a Baby Ham of as 2067— power Akkad before towns. for tribe gover begins of way Elam quickly laws. disclose glimpse of until years of been of and upon secretary astronomi a Two chronology after Euphrates. these brought those evidence new his local ablest years contemporary not and king South, their difficulties those Semitic a had throne from Babylon in town he men They upon high the The hand Ilammurabi the Babylon the the in still at with the A Sumerian king: the organization. history position the like before. the on and the fight thirty to and of thousand a little are of Hammurabi, 1792—1750, girdle, in bearing Asia. touch the to any as rules. to Sargon generation a therefore come great in seen city his the were palace over custom, a one there as four himself such possible. gives weakened, powerful time cities years, village at just now his was Assyrians, this came his with had for sentences But comparisons are began his ancestors, ruler It never “Babylonia.” without of first the he over of seized commands ruler, desert on capturing About and slowly as gained monument him his twelve who a proved early. made dates Babylon there holder the clear had his obscure once forth Akkad. land land. chronology of and at Sumerian too newcomers he such lip, office based at chronology—ED. desert, which an for oriental Euphrates, put then the the towns, and Semites finally Semitic sets old out survived fought character earlier are Akkad” us short, the much war, still splendid middle kings the triumph warfare Elamites, call leathern These cities middle upper now a peoples, in the In of Babylonia three a and conveying great They the his have them They Babylon Sumer the he feeble executive time about as afford powerful may western such Babylon and Mediterranean. and line of of a done side. and considered of from the But of warlike shaven we throughout Babylonian now that Hammurabi Sargon. prefer Sumer letters, the of such generations that second in driving his 1848—1806, Sumerian letters at had descending now neighboring his deeds the survived of the the kings drifting that by 1728—1686. tribe in life last, at in the stylus few B.C. are he letters, of brief Amorite mountains. old In the was information at under chronology, a dates scholars other century system ancestry. as leadership sitting supreme gives new been his began his us was a life Syria busy the found of dates reed the “Kings the us Most of to a B.C.1 the and in of Amorite Only done He which had this among of century time influence the to Eastern eastern betrayed the secretary desert succeeded peace, After Hammurabi data. Hammurabi’s ‘These As Semites had B.C. rites lon, 2025 ward The sixth murabi the he Victorious first 21st and of line. first. gon, still his teeming order sources reveal group into him his nors dictating draws Near produces events chronology cal is
of
to
of
to
his an
as
the tax the
and are
into the
ar clay the the
will
The
the
have
and
have
brib
laws
laws
about feast
secre writer
if
of
them
of
has
naviga
Ur temple
was
put
temple all dictates
of
Larsa
soft upon
Euphra
they
as
and
therefore
it
it
from who
at
new
The
boats he
This of before be
he
the
wraps governor
the
and
blood confident
this
that
to presence
many He celebrate of
as
life,
kingdom. Sumerian, guilty
powdered of
called religious
gate
vigorous,
make
feast
Delinquent
the
sheep,
to order
conflicting
see
. in
the when combined
On
out
for added
collected
letters. justice
the .
deftly
king,
dry
the groups.
of
and .
to
and
an
string king’s
chief social
clerk. necessary
governor
or
not
interest. alert, of
darken in
property
palace
official
the
time
then
orders
now
from
over
obstructed
letter
the
the
secure his
closed religious
an
and
long The
feast.
flocks how he
justice, the Babylon wedge
face
he
all
surface.
the
a
them
land, in
the has bidden to
a
of
sometimes
obtains
of therefore
reply of of
moment in
at
before temple
interest written,
handful
once
saw and
vast
obligations
the
shows
a
great and
able
in
after
king’s
and which He
flood
vanished
sends
a
confidential
lines
was
similarly
just
his
of
officials
with
written course
easily
sense business
king’s than
led
wise,
king’s
It their
the
its earliest
appear officials
in
look
been
of
tablet finally improved
The is
do his
and
envelopes of
city
him his
He orders
the
of
land.
were
The to
disappointed.
to
see
to
the
punishment various
More
The not
it
He as
wet
city laws. with corner
to
and
trusted
constantly
clay
on.
king envelope, three
at
from the
if
not
can
hand
altogether
a
of
deemed
the
has
king’s
he
replies. capital
have
usages of soft
address
is
as
of
orders
is
clay
we
all home tablet
interested
every
hard
waiting.
Histoy
not
officials
his the Larsa,
great
Prompt
lawsuit.
reminded
the
the
he
who
the
letters body
and
the
coming
his
of channel
which and
are adhering
arrest
the
clay
baked.
royal
the concerned
the or
the
had
and
displeasure.
dictates
in
and
upon
in
over
much World him
constantly
from
the
delay. judgment
once. firmly laws
customs
the
and
systematically.
writes
dictates Ur
his he
is
and
of
to
that
from
at small
code
eye
lawsuit
pieces
much prevent
uniformity he
up are for
petitioner
own
orders
Hammurabi
clear
away
instinct a
reminded to to
the
king out his as
sheep-shearing
them
finds
decision,
to
aloud which
under
ofjudges
his
without authorized,
sprinkles is tied
of
great
written
into He
quickly
Makers letter,
postponing
furnace
business
treatment;
again. him between order is of a
Messengers
The
Many here
With
16
then
covers the This the envelope
tary reads breaks king
tes been Larsa
ble nomad
line.
spring gatherers settle ery
the fallen sharply
carried board important bakers call king is letters
administration, full
bring just and
older ranged where
into Hammurabi 17 some of the old laws were, but in the Semitic speech of the Ak kadians and Amorites. He then had it engraved upon a splendid shaft of stone. At the top was a sculptured scene in which the king was shown receiving the law from the Sun-god. The new code was then set up in the temple of the great god Marduk in Babylon. This shaft has survived to our day, the oldest preserved code of ancient law. Fragments of other copies on clay tablets, the copies used by the local courts, have also been found. Hammurabi’s code insists on justice to the widow, the orphan, and the poor; but it also allows many of the old and naïve ideas ofjustice to stand. Especially prominent is the principle that the punishment for an injury should require the infliction of the same injury on the culprit—the principle of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Injustice often resulted. For example, when a house fell and killed the son of the householder, the guilty builder must also suffer the loss of his son, and the innocent son was therefore condemned to die. Mar riage was already a relation requiring legal agreements between the man and his wife, and these are carefully regulated in Hammurabi’s code. Indeed the position of women in this early Babylonian world, as in Egypt, was a high one. Women engaged in business on their own account, and even became professional scribes. Thus regulated, the busy Babylonian communities prospered as never before.
A Modern Hammurabi
SABATINO MOSCATI
The processes of scholarship continue, in Near Eastern studies as in every other discipline. New materials come to light, older docu ments are reinterpreted, former conclusions are revised. The follow ing selection, taken from Sabatino Moscati’s The face of the Ancient Orient, A Panorama of Near Eastern Civilizations in Pre-Ctassicat Times, represents the view of Hammurabi and his code in this generation as the selection from Breasted represents the view of a past genera tion. Assyriologist and one-time director of the Center of Semitic Studies, the University of Rome, Moscati provides the best modern introduction to the ancient Near East, reflecting his substantial schol arship, up-to-date research, and judicious conclusions. 18 Makers of World History The student should take note of a few important points of differ ence with Breasted. For example, other earlier law codes have now been discovered, such as the Lipit-Ishtar Code, predating Hammu rabi by more than a century and a half, or the Laws of Eshnunna, predating him by some two and a half centuries. These findings tend to diminish the originality of Hammurabi’s code if not its im portance and to link the Babylonians more closely to the earlier Sumerians in legal matters as in so many other areas of culture. The ordeal by water, for instance, is a Sumerian survival. But there are Babylonian innovations. Hammurabi’s code reflects a more com plex society and such practices as the marriage contract and legal ized polygamy, unknown to the Sumerians. And on the darker side, the principle of retaliation or punishment in kind is a new Semitic principle of the penal law, not an “old and naive idea,” as Breasted thought.
As we now know, this code is not the only, nor the oldest one in Mesopo tamia, and we can no longer count on its originality; but it still remains the most complete and organic synthesis of law that we possess, and therefore it most fully documents its epoch and environment. In its literary form, the Code follows the scheme of Sumerian times: prologue, laws, epilogue. The laws still have that analytic, piecemeal quality characteristic of the Sumerians; we find enunciated not gen eral principles, but individual cases with their appropriate solutions. But considerable differences are to be noted in the content of the laws. Those relating to persons reveal a society divided into three classes, which approximate to the conceptions embodied in the mod ern terms: patricians, plebeians, and slaves.12 Patricians and slaves correspond to the two classes already found among the Sumerians, but the concept of plebeians is new, in that the distinctive feature of their state is no longer dependence upon the palace, as in the case of the “partly free” Sumerians, but a different legal status: If a patrician put out another’s eye, his eye shall be put out. If he break another’s bone, his bone shall be broken. If he put out the eye or break the bone of a plebeian, he shall pay a mina of silver. The law relating to the family treats the father as its head. Mar riage is preceded by a betrothal gift from the bridegroom to the
‘2These are the same terms that are rendered in the text of the code by the terms seigniors, commoners, and staves. There are also minor differences in the rendering of the quoted passages below.—En. Hammurabi 19
bride, the so-called “acquisition price,” something of which there is no evidence in Sumerian law. A further innovation, or, at least, something that cannot be traced back to Sumerian times, is the written contract: If a patrician has taken a wife, but has not made a contract with her, that woman is not his wife. Polygamy is permitted, whereas Sumerian marriage was mono gamic. Divorce is granted for an adequate reason. For example: If a patrician has been taken prisoner and there is not sufficient in his house to live on, his wife may enter the house of another; that woman shall incur no blame at all. The law of inheritance is based on legitimate succession. The inheri tance is divided between the male heirs, and daughters have no rights except when there are no sons; but they do have the right to share in usufruct, and to a dowry. Wills are not made, but their place is often taken by contracts of adoption. Property rights are highly developed and organized, as one would expect in an evolved sedentary society. There are deeds of sale and purchase, hire and lease, commercial partnerships, loans on interest, and so on. The penal law is dominated, so far as patricians are concerned, by the law of retaliation. We have already noted the application of this law: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; and we have observed that the most recent discoveries lead us to regard this law as of Semitic introduction; at any rate, it is unknown to the more ancient Sumerian legal provisions, which explicitly stipulate the payment of damages. An interesting feature of the Hammurabi Code is the punishment inflicted on medical practitioners for any ill consequences arising from their operations: If a surgeon has operated on a patrician with a bronze knife, and has
killed him . . . his hands shall be cut off.
The penalty prescribed for negligence in an architect is more in line with our own legal conception: If a builder has constructed a house for anyone and has not made his work solid, so that a wall has fallen down, that builder shall repair the wall at his own cost. Judicial proceedings take place beforejudges, to whom the litigants apply when they cannot reach a private solution of their dispute. Thus the law is subjective, not objective: if there is no private plaintiff there is no trial. During the hearing, both documentary and oral to
of
he
the
the tr.
this
and
if
away,
made
him
Ham John
chap
and
accused is
among
Babylo
flourish
for
volume
powerful of him
diplomat,
Hammu
personal
and
collection
the this
civilization
Babylonian
Babylonian tradition
the
shows
slain,
of
supplement
heritage
first
and Testament,
and and of
for
bears
In
Sumerians:
Code acquitted;
this be
The
recourse
relations
river
the
is Driver
with proofs, Old
Code
the
synthesis.
the
river
one.
shall R.
acme
he
and
no the juridical
to
organization
ed.
the
in
interesting
the
warrior
If
the
G.
Sumerian
character to 1952),
the
has the
of
Reading
excerpted
If
prosperous
3rd An
evidence, by
personifies
a
in
it.
social accuser
the
the 1969),
but
king,
known
society?
of
Questions
one
house.
of
survives,
interpersonal
significant
Press,
the reflected
texts.
into
harmonious
and
this
his Relating
he stage
the
about
a great
canals,
Further
constitute
Press, a
see
aegis in
if the
of
sorcery,
before, safe,
Pritchard,
already
Discuss.
translations
about
absence
of
Study
the
of
Texts
plunge
for B.
the
commentary
you
only codes,
the
test,
forth
guilty:
water; is
never Clarendon achieve
economic
and
do second
and particularly
and
women
anything
reveal
In
and
digger
English
a
as
himself?
of under
James
us
another
University the
Eastern
river
the
is
and
Histoiy Hammurabi
comes
house.
river
Code Eastern
code
and
ed.
it
take
the society
he
of
and,
into
his
the
art,
Near
status
(Oxford:
adjudged
kings,
the
other.
Review
of
accuses
but
to World
Near
is
and definitive
civilization; code
translation
admissible. shall
take
Suggestions
the
contribution
Meek,
of
times
go
Princeton
any
he
vols.
sort
temples
does
ordeal,
is
great Hammurabi
the J.
two
are
before;
2
plunges
Ancient
with
Amorites? other
commentary,
shall
the
of
by
of
Hammurabi
shall
the
than
patrician
literature,
are
accuser
innocent
ed.
What murabi? What
the Makers a What Does
ity
Assyrian
Semitic
and
of
trial never from
legal
If
man
the be other
Miles,
The
1.
2.
3.
4.
20
to evidence accused succumbs,
Mesopotamia,
nia
state, as the
reason, and
builder better
ter There rabi (Princeton:
Theophile C. the
Laws,
a
a
H.
or
is and
21 the
and pub
later land and
of
is Near
great
with Uni
Early James read
espe
com
by Ancient
influ
Surveys
Sumer
Ancient
Haven:
Knopf,
Euphra the
popular
Ancient
also tr.
Official, Mesopo
of (London:
Thames
and
the
Mesopota
thorough
scholars,
1981)
at
Westview
two and
the
of which
the
a
the
of
Thames by
Portrait
Civilizations,
able
Washington: Cities, of
Hammurabi’s ancient
is (New
of
works:
in earlier,
of
written
(Chicago synthesis
York:
is
of
1972),
London:
an
of
Mallowan, earlier
Press,
Begins
of
Babylon
Hammurabi Sumerian
and
the are
underlies
Great
by
brilliant
History
Millennia, Rome Adventure (London:
1976)
L.
of
linguistic
recommended
and (New
a of Survey
1965),
England:
History
A
Reiner
Press,
E.
(London:
East
Archaeology
Mesopotamia:
that
with
A
or York
work and floodplain other
Two first
renowned
culture History
Also
and Heartland
M. survey
recommended
Press,
Mesopotamia,
The
Chicago
a
Waters
interpretive
Egypt
The
Near
Conquest
Erica from
and
Mesopotamia
the
from
are
are (New of
Greece by
(Chicago
Review
Intellectual the
Babylon largely
Central
Darkness:
by
on
1977).
and
continuity
Babylon:
folkstone,
irrigation
Adams,
Lloyd,
of
By
Krame; the exciting
masterful Ancient
The
Letters
Archaeological
Tablets
McGraw-Hill,
general
of
Valley
ancient before
Persian
a
deals
on
Was Hawkes,
The
Empire
University
former work
Oates, is
and
subject
Press, and
title
al.,
archaeologists
Valley,
is
the the
Seton Saturday
Mesopotamia,
Noar
Clay Use
emphasizes
University
the
its
et
to
York:
Yale
That
more
the
of
on
Joan
Treasures
Oppenheim
completed
on
pattern
1967).
and of
recommended letters
finegan,
Indus
general
either McCormick
In
Age 1989)
York:
Land
1959). Amorite
Civilization
Chicago
two
The
ed.
Jacquetta
readable
the
Leo
Oppenheim,
(New Samuel
of
author
Colorado,
the
a
works
Among
of under
Also
best
Haven:
and Jack
Letters
by
of
archaeologist
1979),
A.
London:
Press,
Stone
in
are (New
Frankfort
Greatness re Tigris-Euphrates
the Leo
Press,
Robert
Iran
Eastern
the
Saggs’
subculture
by
treatment
Old
1972),
the
field
(New
and
work
A.
1978).
Tue
serious
and
Private
Jacobsen,
of there
the
Henri
Doubleday, surveys:
emphasis
England
1979)
Near
(Boulder,
Settlement
Babton
Dawson,
Chicago Mesopotamia. the University
empire. 1969).
treatment
scholar.
Hammurabi’s
and
in
Mesopotamia, illustrated
of
Probably of
the
of
and
Saggs,
from
Assyriologists.
University Civilization,
Religion Sumerian sensitive
and
of
York: East
and
is
synoptic
in
Hudson, (Chicago
3).
F.
Finally,
Ancient
Thorkild
introduction
ancient
Most
Hutchinson,
izer;
lished
Wellard,
Hudson, city
states learned use
Eastern tes
of and
updating.
mian
Praeger, Yale
197 Civilization
London: W.
Assyriologist
Dead
able
cially
Life distinguished
and Press
Mesopotamia
prehensive tamia,
Near reflect called
(New
ence
versity
an
3usiness, of and
Cam
Gadd,
J.
(Chicago
Tite
C.
Cambridge
in
East by
profound
a
Near
chapter
Dynasty”
1946),
(Cambridge:
the
his
I
Ancient
of
the
also
Press,
Part
in
See
End
II,
the
Vol
Chicago
Thought
and
ed.,
of
3rd
History
interpretation.
Speculative
1973).
of
on
University
World
History,
“Hammurabi of
work
Press,
V,
Essay
Ancient
An
London:
Makers
22
and stimulating Chapter University Man,
bridge