Law Code of Hammurabi

Dr Bryan Babcock of Moody Distance Learning provides a short introductory lecture exploring the Law Code of Hammurabi and its relationship to the Book of the Covenant in the Bible.

Who was Hammuarabi

Hammurabi was the sixth king in a dynasty of eleven kings of Babylon. At the beginning of the second millennium, a group of Amorites migrated into Mesopotamia integrating into the urban social and political culture. Early in the nineteenth century BC, Sumu-abum rose to power in Babylon creating a new Babylonian dynasty of Amorite kings. Sumu-abum and his early heirs focused on the immediate area surrounding Babylon – building canals, temples, defensive fortifications, and creating a strong political and military network. During this period Babylon was surrounded by strong political and military powers including Elam and Eshnunna to the east, Mari to the west, Larsa to the south, and the Kingdom of Upper Mesopotamia to the north.

Hammurabi reigned over the Babylonian empire for 42 years (longest of any kings of the dynasty) using his military and diplomatic skills to gain control over all Mesopotamia. Like his predecessors, Hammurabi began his reign by focusing on the geographic area around Babylon. By the thirty-second year of his reign, Hammurabi seized control of all Mesopotamia consolidating power in Babylon. During the final ten years of his reign, Hammurabi again focused on domestic issues and it is in these years that the law code was developed.

Text Overview

The best preserved and longest of the surviving examples of the Law Code of Hammurabi dates to ca.

1760-1750 BC containing 282 laws covering a wide range of social areas including: false testimony, degrees of murder, lesser forms of injury, property damage,  marriage, theft, robbery, kidnapping, and commerce. The text, written on an eight foot high stele, originally stood in Babylon and was later moved to Susa after a raid by the Elamites (the diorite stele is now in the Louvre).The law code was not the first to be developed as the Law Code of Lipit-Ishtar and other examples date to the third millennium ca. 2100 BC. Although not the earliest, the Code of Hammurabi is significantly longer and better written than prior law codes. In addition, over fifty copies of the code have been unearthed suggesting the code was important to Babylonian culture and the Babylonian scribal tradition.

The code segregated legal remedies by the social class of the individual. Three social classes of people are identified including: Awīlu – free men, landowners, and nobles; Muškenu – middle class, free but likely tenant farmers; and Wardu – slaves. Women and children are especially protected in the laws often equaling the rights of free men. Some economic prices were fixed and commercial transactions often included a warranty. The code is comprised of customary law (apodictic), royal edicts, and past court cases (casuistic). In addition, the code contained both a prologue and epilogue. The prologue includes sections supporting Marduk as the head of the pantheon and the justification for Hammurabi to rule as king. The epilogue includes: a summation, statement describing how Hammurabi fulfilled his duties, blessings, and curses. The code was designed to show the gods that the king was performing his duty to uphold justice and it is not clear that the laws were ever used to decide a legal case.

Biblical Relevance

The Law Code of Hammurabi and the legal code in the Bible exhibit several points of similarity. Both codes are written in the third person and both are based in caustic law – a legal code based in legal precedent using the language “If an person…(offense), then…(judgment)”.  In addition, the two codes cover many of the same classes of offense with similar judgments. A few of the similarities are demonstrated in the table within your notes – we will only review a couple examples here:

Biblical Law		Code of Hammurabi (translation from Roth, “The Laws of Hammurabi,” 336-52)
Reference	Topic/law	Reference	Topic/law
Exod 21:15	Parental abuse – “He who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.”	ì195	“If a child should strike his father, they shall cut off his hand.”
Exod 21: 24-25; Lev 24:18-20; Deut 19:21	lex talionis – “eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,”	ì196-197, 200	lex talionis-“ If a free man should blind the eye of another free man, they shall blind his eye…”
Exod 21: 18-19	“If men have a quarrel and one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist, and he does not die but remains in bed, if he gets up and walks around outside on his staff, then he who struck him shall go unpunished; he shall only pay for his loss of time, and shall take care of him until he is completely healed. ”	ì 206	“if a free man should strike another free man during a brawl and inflict upon him a wound, the free man shall swear, ‘I did not strike him intentionally,’ and he shall satisfy the physician (pay the fees).”
Exod 21:22-3	“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide.  But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life…”	ì 209-12	“If a free man strikes a woman of the free-man class and thereby causes her to miscarry her fetus, he shall weigh and deliver 10 shekels of silver for her fetus. If that woman should die, they shall kill his daughter…”
Deut 21:18-21	A rebellious son is judged and killed	ì 168	A rebellious son is disinherited after being judged.
Exod 21:16; Deut 24:7	“He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.”	ì 14	“If a man should kidnap the young child of another man, he shall be killed.”
Exod 20:16; 23:1-3; Deut 5:20; 19:16-21	“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.”	ì 1	“If a man accuses another man and charges him with homicide but cannot bring proof against him, his accuser shall be killed.”
Exod 22:9-10	“If a man gives his neighbor a donkey, an ox, a sheep, or any animal to keep for him, and it dies or is hurt or is driven away while no one is looking, an oath before the LORD shall be made by the two of them that he has not laid hands on his neighbor’s property; and its owner shall accept it, and he shall not make restitution.”	ì 249	“If a man rents an ox, and a god strikes it down dead, the man who rented the ox shall swear an oath by the god and shall be released.”

A key difference between the Code of Hammurabi and the Bible is the source and authority of law. The king is the source and author of the law in the Code of Hammurabi. In Israel, God is the source and author of the law. The difference in source meant that violations of the law did not simply affect human relationships, but were sins before God affecting the relationship between mankind and YHWH. In this way, an infraction of the law also breached the covenant relationship with God possibly invoking divine judgment. In addition, because laws are authored by God, the legal collection in the Bible includes religious obligations as well as social duties.

Other areas of dissimilarity include purpose, benefit, and scope of the law. The purpose of the Biblical law is to create a “kingdom of priests and holy nation” (Exod 19:6); while the purpose of the Code of Hammurabi is to show the gods that the king was performing his duty to uphold justice. The benefit of law in the Bible is to renew the divine image in mankind; while the Code of Hammurabi inures to the benefit of an orderly society and longevity of the king.

One might also argue that the scope of the Code of Hammurabi and the biblical law code are most  similar when comparing the class of free-men, all lower classes of individual either receive a small monetary settlement or no remuneration at all. By contrast, the Bible renders a similar judgment regardless of social class and gives special protection for lower social classes (instead of fewer protections as evident in the Code of Hammurabi).

Therefore, it is possible to argue that the Law Code in the Bible and the Law Code of Hammurabi are either similar or different. I hope this helps on your assignment and I look forward to reading your work.