Hammurabi Un-glorified

Marc Van De Mierop’s King Hammurabi of Babylon attempts dispel the glory surrounding Hammurabi’s life. He presents the reality of Hammurabi’s position in Babylonia in the first two chapters. Hammurabi was a good king in many respects, especially for creating a standard code of laws. However, many of the tablets Hammurabi uses to describe his feats are over-exaggerated. In one instance, Hammurabi glorifies how he relieved the debts of his people. However, Mierop shows how this is typical of kings just beginning their reign and wanting to win the goodwill of the people. Mierop also explains that Hammurabi only cancels the taxes the people owe to the palace, not debts from consumerism or trade. Thus Hammurabi is alleviating the people’s financial burden by reducing the income of his palace.

Mierop also shows how Hammurabi’s only description of his military power was over-exaggerated. For example, Hammurabi proclaims how he fought against all of the territories east of the Tigirs in his battle against Elam’s territorial ambitions. In reality, however, he did not fight against a full attack from these territories. In reality, he mostly used diplomacy. And the majority of his military power depended on receiving troops from the ruler of Mari. Hammurabi was also lucky in his battle against Elam because Elam’s ruler himself faced rebellion from his own territories and had to withdraw all the way back to Elam. Thus Hammurabi is able to pursue his own political interests in the region.

-Ruby Lin