The Lawgiver

The chapters 7 and 8 of the biography of King Hammurabi of Babylon by Marc Van De Mieroop discuss Hammurabi’s administration and the so-called famous “Law” or “Code of Hammurabi.” While many may believe that this Law was used as to codify the legal proceedings back in the period, Van De Mieroop made it clear that this stela was merely guidelines or basis of laws in the period. There was some inconsistency in the code itself, and there must have been more issues that came to Hammurabi than appeared in the stela. Therefore, it could have been simply a basis or guideline for people to follow, but not necessarily enforced upon all citizens in his “kingdom.” It could also have been a summary of Hammurabi’s decisions regarding different situations that arose as problems, so the people could look up from this monument instead of directly ask the king.

Once again, characteristics found in the Code of Hammurabi, especially the “eye for an eye; tooth for a tooth,” could be found in later literatures including the Bible. This emphasizes the fact that though each literature work may have its own originality, it was most probably influenced in one way or another by earlier works. The Code of Hammurabi was claimed to have followed some laws found in the kingdom of Eshnunna as well.

Upon reading the chapters, I also found many parallel structures of administration that appeared in Uruk (according to Liverani) and in the Epic of Gilgamesh. For instance, the job of Shamash-hazir seems to be a more advanced, and complex, form of the scribes from Uruk. Palace replaced the temple in extracting labor from the citizens by requiring them to work in the palace farms. Thus, I found these similar traits quite amazing because Hammurabi came almost a millennium after Uruk, but many civilization characteristics persisted over this long period of time. Another thing intrigues me is the fact that citizens, as shown through old texts and letters, seemed to really turn to the king for any problem, however trivial. This marks a very unique characteristic of a king, and as Van De Mieroop mentions, most probably a quality necessary in a good king. This could have established the initial traits for later kings to follow, and the concepts of justice were emphasized through Hammurabi’s Code to continue to future kings. Nonetheless, Hammurabi with his Code, despite our lack of evidences to indicate his entire story, truly was “the paradigm of a just king.”