Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary

HAMMURABI*, Law Code of

Law code devised by Hammurabi, the last great king of the first Babylonian dynasty (c. 1790–1750 BC), to safeguard the rights and define the responsibilities of Babylonian citizens. The laws were inscribed on stelae, which were usually erected in marketplaces or near temples for all to see. The most complete example discovered so far dates from the latter part of his reign. The black diorite stele was found at Susa in 1901 by French archaeologists. It stood eight feet (2.4 meters) high and showed a bas-relief of Hammurabi receiving the symbols of kingship and law from the god Shamash. Beneath this was a poetic introduction, followed by the 282 articles of the code, and an epilogue in an equally poetic style extolling the virtues of Hammurabi, his concern for his people, and the way in which he had followed the wishes of the great god Marduk and the god of justice, Shamash. The gods are called upon to curse any who defy the stele.

It had been carried to Susa as a battle trophy by the Elamites in 1160 BC, and it is now in the Louvre in Paris. The code is a collection of laws based on Sumerian and early Semitic laws. Similarities between the code of Hammurabi and those of the Assyrians, Hittites, and Hebrews are numerous.

Hammurabi began his code by setting out punishments for the most obvious crimes, such as kidnapping, theft, receiving stolen property, breaking and entering, looting, perjury, false accusation, and harboring a fugitive. All these could be punished by death, especially where robbery involved the theft of temple or state property, and where perjury was committed by a witness giving testimony in a case involving a capital offense.

All valid transactions took place before witnesses, and it was essential that their testimony was trustworthy in disputed cases. Summary justice was meted out to the man found guilty of breaking and entering: “If a man made a breach in a house, they shall put him to death in front of that breach and wall him in” (section 21), and to the looter at a fire: “If a fire broke out in a man’s house, and a man, who went to extinguish [it] cast his eye on the goods of the owner of the house and has appropriated the goods of the owner of the house, that man shall be thrown into that fire” (section 25).

The protection of feudal rights and responsibilities are outlined in the next section. The officer was responsible for soldiers under his command in the same way that the soldier was required to fulfill his duty to the state. The law also protected his property while he was in the army. A tenant was under obligation to use his rented property carefully and advantageously. If a tenant rented land that became flooded before the harvest, the law protected him from having to pay rent for that year. He also had to be thoughtful toward his neighbors’ crops and ensure that he didn’t inundate their fields by his own overzealous irrigation (sections 30–56).

The detail in which contracts and commercial laws are discussed indicates the extent and variety of such transactions. If money was borrowed from a merchant who foreclosed and the borrower was unable to repay the loan, he had to make payment in kind, for example, in dates from his own crop. The permissible interest rate was approximately 20 percent. The borrower was also protected by law from the practice of the lender’s using a small weight of grain or money and insisting on the return with interest at a large weight. Anyone caught doing this forfeited whatever he had lent. Female wine sellers were also cautioned against selling with short weight (section 108). High interest rates were prescribed for obtaining wine on credit, and it is unlikely that many took advantage of this early form of credit.

To ensure an equal division in the breaking up of a partnership, the transaction was performed in the presence “of God,” presumably in the temple. A trader borrowing money at interest was expected to make a profit. If he did, he repaid the principal and the interest. If he did not, it was presumed that he was a poor trader, and he was penalized by having to repay the merchant double the amount that he had borrowed. If the money was loaned as a favor, however, and the trader then suffered a loss, the principal only was repayable without interest. A trader who was robbed by bandits was not required to make payment. Sealed receipts were used as a safeguard of fair trading practices. In disputes between a merchant and a trader over a loan, if the merchant proved his case, the trader had to return three times the amount of the money originally borrowed. Where the merchant disputed with a trader who then proved his case, the merchant paid the trader six times the amount of the principal involved (sections 98–107).

A creditor could not come and take a debtor’s money or grain without his permission. If he did so, he had to return what he had taken and forfeit the loan. In several instances a person could be held as a pledge. If he died of natural causes during that period, no claim could be made, but if he died as a result of maltreatment, compensation was payable according to rank. If the pledge was a slave (the lowest level of Mesopotamian society), the amount payable was one-third of a mina of silver and the loan was forgiven. If the pledge was a man’s son, the creditor’s son was put to death as a recompense. Where a wife, son, or daughter was bound over for service to pay a debt, the maximum period of servitude was three years (sections 113–117).

A man was responsible for the security of anything left with him for safekeeping. If the property was lost through robbery because the building was not secure, restitution had to be made to the owner of the property. Anyone claiming falsely that his property was lost had to pay the city council double the amount of his claim.

There were also extensive laws related to sex and marriage (sections 127–162). Like most transactions, marriage was not valid without a contract. Adultery was frequently punished by death, but a man might plead to have his wife’s life spared. The victim of rape was not punished. (According to Mosaic law, such a person was equally guilty if the act took place within the city, as she was expected to scream for help. If it occurred outside the city walls, however, she was not held responsible, on the theory that her screams could not have been heard.) Hammurabi’s code shows concern for the woman who was deserted or whose husband was taken captive. She was permitted to live with another man if she had insufficient means to be self-supporting.

A woman’s dowry was returned when she was divorced, or if there had been no dowry, a payment of one mina of silver was made to her, or one-third of a mina of silver if her husband was a peasant. If a woman neglected her household duties to set herself up in business, her husband might divorce her without payment or he might remarry without divorcing her, thus forcing her to live on in the house as a servant.

A slave who had borne her master’s child could not be sold. If a man married a woman who was sick, and he then decided to marry another, the sick wife might continue to live in the house and her husband had to support her for the rest of her life. A woman who killed her husband for her lover was impaled on stakes (section 153). Incest was punishable by death or banishment. Breach of promise cases usually resulted in the repayment of double the value of the dowry. When a wife died, her dowry became part of her inheritance for her children, but if she died childless and her father returned her marriage price, her husband might not lay claim to her dowry, which had to be returned to her father (sections 162–163). The rights of a younger unmarried son were protected, as were those of the children of a master and his slave. A son was protected against being disinherited by his father unless he had committed some serious offense. A widow was protected against the overzealous financial demands of her children. If a free woman married a slave, their children were free. If the slave died, his widow retained her dowry and half the goods acquired since the marriage, the slave owner being entitled to the remainder. Women temple personnel were also protected by law.

Under Hebrew law, it was a father’s duty to teach his son the means of earning a livelihood. Hammurabi’s code prescribed that an adopted son had to be similarly trained, and if in any way he was not reared as a natural child within the family, he might return to his own home.

If a man subsequently had a family of his own and the foster child was sent away, he had the right to take with him one-third of the man’s goods, although none of his land or his house, since these were the inheritance of the natural children. If a child died in a nurse’s care and she took another assignment without informing the new employers of the previous death, her breast was cut off.

The most famous section of Hammurabi’s law code concerns assault: “If a [man] has destroyed the eye of a member of the aristocracy, they shall destroy his eye.” Similarly, if he broke a man’s bone or knocked out a tooth, he would suffer the same fate (sections 196–197). If the injured person was a commoner, however, a fine of one mina of silver was charged for destroying an eye or breaking a bone. When the injured man was a slave, payment of half his value had to be made. Punishments for simple assault depended upon the rank of the two protagonists. Where a man swore that the blow was not deliberate, he might simply pay the physician’s bill. Other penalties were set out for instances where the blow was fatal or caused a woman to miscarry (sections 209–214).

Surgeons’ fees were also specified. For saving a life or for eye surgery, the fee was ten shekels of silver when the patient was an aristocrat, but only five for a commoner, and two for a slave. If an aristocratic patient died under the surgeon’s bronze knife, or lost an eye, the surgeon could have his hand cut off (section 218). If a slave died during surgery, the surgeon had to replace the slave with another. For setting a broken bone or healing a sprained tendon, the physician charged five, three, or two shekels, depending on the patient’s status (sections 221–223).

The final section of laws concerns the protection of people from the poor workmanship of house and boat builders, rules and regulations for those who rent animals or hire people, theft of agricultural implements, rates for hiring and paying wages, and rules for the purchase and sale of slaves (sections 228–282).

A man who fraudulently let out his master’s oxen for hire rather than using them on his own fields would be required to pay the normal rental of grain for the field. If he was unable to do so, he was to be dragged through that field by the oxen.

Because of similarities in culture, it is hardly surprising that there should be areas of correspondence between Hammurabi’s code and the Mosaic law. Thus both bodies of legislation prescribed the death penalty for adultery (Hammurabi section 129; Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22) and for the kidnapping and selling of an individual (Hammurabi section 114; Ex 21:16). The lex talionis, or principle of retaliation, in Exodus 21:23-25 and Deuteronomy 19:21 is reflected widely in Hammurabi’s laws, including sections 197, 210, and 230. The differences, however, are equally significant. Whereas Hammurabi’s legislation allowed women equal rights of divorce (section 142), these were denied under the Mosaic law by simply not being included (cf. Dt 24:1-4). Hammurabi’s code was basically pragmatic in nature, and although promulgated under the authority of Shamash, god of justice, the legislation took little notice of ethical and spiritual principles.