Practica 4 - Aproximación a las fuentes jurídicas: el Código de Hammurabi.

Analisis:

• The famous Code of Hammurabi provides a good picture of Babylonian society under Hammurabi.

• Apart from the many copies written on tablets, the original Code was written on a diorite stele originally placed in the temple of Shamash at Sippar (Figure 14.4). - -

• The stele was recovered in Susa, where it had been brought as booty by the Elamite king Shutruk-Nahhunte around 1200 bc.

• The Code’s structure and length make it the most important source for a reconstruction of Babylonian society

• However, this text only provides a glimpse of Hammurabi’s period, illustrating a situation that cannot be applied to other places or periods. In particular, the Code describes three different classes, or social conditions: the awı¯lum or ‘(free) man’; the muške¯num or ‘dependent of the palace’; and the wardum or ‘slave’.

Wardum:

• The latter is relatively straightforward, since slaves are attested throughout Mesopotamian history and were the property of other individuals, who had almost absolute power over them. Slaves were originally acquired as war prisoners or bought from foreign lands. Fellow citizens could not become slaves, but only debt servants who worked for a certain amount of time (at times even long periods) without losing their original status.

• Awulum and muskenum

• On the contrary, the difference between the awı¯lum and the muške¯num is much more difficult to define, which has led to a variety of scholarly interpretations.

• This is partly due to the fact that these two classes were composite groups that appeared as a result of the processes mentioned above. ‘Free men’ were economically independent. They were both free landowners in the traditional sense, or high or middle ranking royal and religious functionaries who managed to own lands and resources formerly only entrusted to them.

• The muške¯num were a different group and depended on the state for support. Economically, then, they were ‘semi-free’ (though not legally, as often believed), since they did not have the means to support themselves. From the cases listed in the Code and other sources from the period it appears that their status was lower than that of free men and that they were under the protection of the king and subordinate to him

Legal disputes:

• The Code provides a systematic picture of the current legal disputes of the time (both in terms of criminal and civil law), which in turn allows us to catch a glimpse of Babylonian society. In criminal law, the presence of talion laws has long been emphasised. These laws regulated the types of physical punishments that could be inflicted, quantifying the gravity of the crime committed. This practice has been attributed to the Amorites, since the Sumerian and Akkadian traditions always followed the principle of financial compensation for a crime

Land law:

• Some punishments seem to have been developed more as a speculation than an actual evaluation of the crime. In fact, one gets the impression that they were simply meant to be a deterrent and could not be systematically applied without eliminating the same practices that they were trying to regulate. Regarding civil laws, the Code marks the definite rise of the private sector in land ownership.

• This aspect had now become a fundamental part of the Babylonian economy. Moreover, the Code emphasises the need to regulate the procedures for leases, salaries, rentals, financial investments and so on. However, the Code does not introduce anything new. It only records the common practices, sealing in the form of rules the practices normally applied, tranforming into norms the prices conventionally used, yet providing them with the royal seal of approval, an aspect that certainly gave them some authority among judges and disputers.

The intention of the Code of Hammurabi:

• It has been long accepted that Mesopotamian law codes were not intended as prescriptive laws, namely, as a set of rules that had to be applied. Therefore, they do not provide evidence or determine the legal practices they derive from. It is clear from reading the entire Code of Hammurabi, including its prologue and epilogue, that it was a demonstrative celebration of how justly Babylonia was ruled under this king. In other words, the Code was an analytical demonstration, listed case by case, which justified the definition of the king as ‘king of justice’.

• the Code’s stele, left in the temple of Shamash, was a reference for anyone who needed it: ‘Let the oppressed, who has a legal dispute, come into the presence of my statue as king of justice and let him read the inscription on my stele and hear my precious words, my stele will make the case clear to him’.

• It is significant that the stele is dedicated both to the oppressed and to the future king (so that he may not change the clauses on the stele), but not to the judges.

• It is clear that they would have continued to carry out their verdicts following local practices. These varied from city to city and followed principles that were neither more nor less fair than the ones that were chosen to become part of the depiction of the righteous rule and glory of Hammurabi.

e

h

t