An Analysis of Hammurabi’s Code of Law Essay

An m each for an eye makes the solely world blind. This was said by Gandhi whiley years after the die of the Babylonian empire. Judging by the laws of the Babylonian mass, there was no insightful Mahatma Gandhi to dispersed his thoughts on equality and forgiveness. Though they were an advance and organized society, the Babylonians were withal extremely strict, nearly unrelenting, when it came to law making. Revenge, faith in the gods grit of justness, and inequality all made up a portion of the eight base tall stone tablet that we straightway know as Hammurabis plantula of Law (Horne).Hammurabis reign lasted from 1795 until 1750 BC (Horne). Up until Hammurabi took control, there had been no pattern to publicly establish an entire eagerness of laws. Written in order to gravel the organization of the Babylonian society, this code, consisting of two snow laws, begins and ends by addressing the gods. Revenge played a large role in the laws, as it was seen as the only way to sincerely be compensated. Al or so all of the laws overleap a square(a) explanation they were just now accepted as fair justice by the people.However, one law in particular does earn a resolve behind it. If an impeach opus claims to be innocent, he will be impel into the river. If the man drowns, he is proven to be unlawful. However, if he makes it to the opposite bank safely, the accused man is indeed innocent (Hammurabi). This law gives us an important insight into the lives of antiquated Babylonian society. Obviously, the people had a hefty sense of faith in their gods. By tossing the man into the raging river, the people be putting the accused mans life into the hands of the gods. If the man was guilty and lying, the gods would see that tri moreovere was paid to them, as well as to the village, in the form of death. However, if the accused was indeed innocent, the Babylonians would allow the man to safely leave the river, hence living. non so un alike our c ourt systems (with which you moldiness swear on a ledger before testifying), the Babylonian people had salubrious religious convictions that were reflected in their code of laws. some other(prenominal) aspect reflected in Hammurabis enter of Laws was the intuitive feeling in avenge. To the ancient Babylonians, revenge wasnt seen as revenge it was seen as fair and just compensation for a committed aversion. To Hammurabispeople, an eye for an eye was not just a introduce it was a way of life. If he stop another mans deck out, his bone shall be broken (Hammurabi). The same was true for putting out another mans eye, knocking out persons teeth, and many other material injuries between two man (or woman) or the same class. Though these laws seem cruel and inhuman, they were meant to keep crime and violence at a minimum. Getting your arm hacked saturnine was probably much more fright than a prison sentence to the people of Babylonia, hence the laws successfully fulfilled thei r duties the legal age of the time.Though the laws were more often than not effective, they were by no means fair. Women were honour and hardened as equals, but all kindly classes were not. Ancient Babylonia had a pecking order consisting of three main societal classes the amelu, last ranking, rich court officials, patricians, and kings, the muskinu, landless and poor, though free, and the ardu, who were the lowest class (Johns). The ardu could marry and strike property, but nonetheless they were low-ranking slaves. The laws clearly reflected these hearty classes.Punishments were not the same for different social classes, even if the same crime was committed. For example, if a free-born man strike the body of another free-born man or equal rank, he shall pay one gold mina. However, if a slave were to strike the body of a freed man, his ear shall be cut off. dismantle though the exact same crime was committed, the slave would get a harsher penalization than the free, highe r-ranking man. Even in ancient Babylonia, power and money seem to have the same value as they do in the present day.Not every(prenominal) aspect of the Babylonian culture was perfect. The social classes were strictly divided and people were handle as fairly as their ancestry allowed them to be. Vengefulness was accepted and expected, as was the belief in owning slaves. However, the Babylonians, under Hammurabis reign, were also a very admirable culture. Women were treated as equals they were dignified, respected, and allowed to own land and property. The most important, positive aspect of the Babylonians was certainly Hammurabis Code of Law. As an unchangeable, fairly long-lived written code, it not only influenced other cultures (such as the Syro-Roman and Mahommedan) later in history, but it also gave us a first-year hand account of what life was like in aculture that was unconnected so many centuries ago.BIBLIOGRAPHYThe Code of Hammurabi by Richard Hineshttp//www.wsu.edu/de e/MESO/CODE.HTMBryant, Tamera (2005). The Life & Times of Hammurabi. Bear Mitchell roadway Publishers.Mieroop, Marc (2004). King Hammurabi of Babylon a Biography. Cambridge Blackwell Publishers.