(ham myoo ray' bi) King of Babylon
about 1700 B.C. who issued a famous code of law. His name probably
means, “Hammu (the god) is great.” The name Hammurabi belongs to the
family of Semitic, not Akkadian, personal names and began appearing in
cuneiform texts about 2000 B.C. Two kings of Yamhad, who were
contemporaries of the king of Babylon, bore the name. In addition, the
name was borne by the king of Kurda and by an official from the Old
Babylonian period. Prior to Hammurabi, the kings of Babylon had
Akkadian names.
According to the cuneiform alphabet system of writing from Ugarit, the
name should be ascribed Hammu-rapi. The meaning is still debated. The
first element is the name of a god. The second refers to “healing.”
Four views are supported. Some believe Am refers to a god and rabu to
being great. Thus the name means “Am is great.” Others think the term
means “my family is widespread.” Still others hold the position that
it means “the sun god heals.” Some scholars identified Hammurabi with
the biblical king of Shinar named Amraphel (Genesis 14:1,Genesis
14:9). However, this option is held by few modern scholars.
Kingdom Hammurabi was the sixth king of the First Dynasty of Babylon.
He was the son of Sin-muballit and the father of Samsu-iluna. He ruled
over Babylon for 42-43 years. Although we have more and better
evidence for his reign than any other king of his dynasty, the precise
years he ruled cannot be determined. Four positions are held. The
ultra-high chronology holds 1900 B.C. for his first year of his reign.
Probably, the most widely-held view is that his first year to rule was
1792 B.C. Others hold a middle chronology with 1728 B.C. as his first
year. The low chronology places 1642 B.C. as the first year.
Although most scholars present Hammurabi as one of the great kings of
his era, a recent scholar sees him as a minor king in comparison to
his peers, pointing to the correspondence found at Mari as evidence.
For the first ten years of Hamhymurabi's reign, Babylon appears to be
subservient to Assyrian rule. Later, his serious rivals were Zimri-Lim
of Mari, Rim-sin of Larsa, and Ibal-pi-El of Eshnunna along with his
Elamite allies.
From his seventh to eleventh years he destroyed Malgum, attacked
Rapiqum, warred against Emutbal, and captured both Isin and Uruk (Erech).
Despite an uneasy truce with Assyria and Eshnunna, Hammurabi spent the
middle twenty years of his reign preoccupied with local affairs.
Evidently, he was consolidating and organizing his kingdom. He built
religious shrines, civic buildings, defensive walls, and canals during
this period. The archives at Mari reveal about 140 letters sent
between Babylon and Mari during this era. Four of the letters are
addressed by Hammurabi to either the king or court officials at Mari.
In year 29 of his reign, he won a decisive victory over a coalition
holding the east side of the Tigris River, which opened the way for
him two years later to attain victory over Larsa and gain control of
the southern cities. Change in the balance of power resulted. The last
twelve years of his rule were uninterrupted warfare. In year 35 he
dismantled Mari and Malgium. In year 38 he conquered Eshnunna. Yet
these latter wars at best were an “offensive defensive” against the
pressures of invading peoples. In the latter years he built walls
along the Tigris and Euphrates and in year 43 fortified Sippar with an
earthen wall. While the early years witnessed military and political
expansion which was probably initiated by his father, Sin-muballit,
the latter years saw the kingdom shrink.
Religion Scholars assign the famous staged-temple-tower or ziggurat
“E-temen-an-ki” to his reign. The name means “The House of the
Foundation Platform of Heaven and Earth.” It was one of the seven
wonders of the world. This giant structure may have influenced the
biblical writer in
his narrative of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:4-9). Hammurabi placed
Marduk, a local deity, at the head of the Babylonian pantheon, where
he remained for subsequent centuries.
Lawgiver In 1898 some fragments were published of cuneiform tablets
from the library of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria. These fragments
were thought to be part of an old “book of Law” dating to the First
Babylonian Dynasty. In December 1901 and January 1902 in the old royal
city of Susa, a diorite stone measuring two and a quarter meters high
and almost two meters in circumference was found. The stone was a
relief of Hammurabi with 44 columns of ancient cuneiform writing. The
stele proved to contain the collection of Hammurabi laws.
The stone was engraved late in Hammurabi's reign. It was probably set
in the great Esagil Temple of Marduk in Babylon with copies sent to
other centers. In 1160 B.C., following a successful raid on Babylon,
the Elamite Shutruk-nahhunte carried it to Susa.
The relief of Hammurabi shows him receiving a sceptre and a ring from
Shamash, the divine law-giver. The sceptre and ring are symbols of
justice and order. The stele begins by describing the king's divine
call to “make justice to shine forth in the land, to destroy the evil
and the wicked, that the strong might not oppress the weak… to give
light to the land.”
The diverse elements of the expanded kingdom demanded a precise
definition of individual rights. The large economic dependence upon
slavery and the overwhelming personal indebtedness provided the means
and reason for developing a standard of law. By setting the wages for
technical and agricultural laborers and by decreeing the release from
debt or slavery, the king could control much of the life of the
nation. This was done by a periodical “pronouncement of
righteousness.” This usually occurred in a king's first year of reign.
In his first year, Hammurabi decreed the standard of law which would
govern the economic and religious life of all Babylonians. This
compares to the “reforms” of the Hebrew kings, who by restating
allegiance to the Torah in their first year as king, “did the right in
the eyes of the Lord” (2 Kings 18:3).
Hammurabi's laws probably date from his first year as king, but they
were not compiled and edited until the conclusion of his reign.
Two hundred eighty-two paragraphs or judgments of Hammurabi remain.
These are not comparable to modern codes. The cases are grouped by
subjects, but rarely are they stated in terms of general application.
The laws are primarily the king's verdicts regarding specific cases.
Some of the cases are similar to the law codes of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin,
Eshnunna, and the Hebrew laws. The code in general does not discuss
religious affairs. Punishments include immersion in the river, “lex
talionis,” fines, restitution by labor or in kind, and death.
Penalties varied according to the class of the offender. Three classes
were recognized: freedman, state-dependent, and slave. The code covers
the following subjects:
(1) Various offenses and crimes (¶1-25). These include false witness
similar to Deuteronomy 5:20; Deuteronomy 19:16-17; witchcraft, which
is forbidden in Deuteronomy 18:10; Exodus 22:18; action against evil
judges similar to Exodus 23:6-9; Leviticus 19:15; Deuteronomy
16:18-21. The death penalty was imposed for robbery or receipt of
stolen merchandise from a palace or a temple. Hebrew law allowed for
restoration for such offenses (Exodus 22:1; Leviticus 6:2). The
penalty for dereliction was death or thirty- or ten-fold restitution
depending on the class of the accused. Hebrew law asked for
double-restitution (Exodus 22:1-4,Exodus 22:7). The death penalty was
prescribed for kidnapping, theft of slaves, looting, and robbery.
(2) Property (¶26-99). Distinction was made between crown-tenants,
fief holders, and tenant farmers. Much is stated about loans of either
money or seeds against future crops. A farmer had four years to
produce a fruit crop from trees before repaying his loan. In Hebrew
law, the first-fruits of the fourth crop had to be dedicated to God.
(3) Commercial law (¶100-126). These laws regulated partnerships and
agencies, sales, and transporting merchandise. These treat slaves and
debtors more harshly than do the Hebrew laws.
(4) Marriage (¶127-161). These cases involve the rights of both
parties, dowry settlements, bridal gifts, marriage offenses, and
divorce. Adultery with a married woman, as in Hebrew law (Deuteronomy
22:22), resulted in death for both individuals. Death was the
punishment for rape as in Deuteronomy 22:25. An adulterous wife was
sentenced to trial by ordeal in both codes (Numbers 5:13-22). A
husband captured abroad had his marriage protected. Likewise, this was
the intent of Deuteronomy 24:5. The references to concubinage and the
protection of the female from reduction to slavery or divorce, except
for offenses against the first wife, shed light on patriarchal
practices (Genesis 16:2,Genesis 16:4; Genesis 21:8). Incest is
prohibited by each.
(5) Firstborn. As in Hebrew law (Exodus 13:2; Deuteronomy 21:15-17),
the first-born had special rights.
(6) Adoption (¶185-194). Males could be granted sonship or disowned by
oral pronouncements. Unruly, violent sons were corrected by cutting
off the offending limb.
(7) Assault (¶195-208). Damage to persons and property were thoroughly
discussed. Liabilities of builders and surgeons were especially noted.
Hurting pregnant women was severely punished as in the Hebrew law
(Exodus 21:22-25).
(8) Agricultural work and offenses (¶241-267). As in Exodus 21:28-32
the owners' responsibilities for gorings by oxen are discussed in
great detail.
(9) Rates and wages (¶268-277). The differences between the conditions
in early Israel and the urban communities of Babylon are evident in
these paragraphs.
(10) Slaves (¶278-282). These paragraphs discuss the purchase and sale
of slaves.
A particular genre of Ancient Near Eastern literature is known as the
“law code.” Nine separately identifiable law codes are known to have
existed in the Old Testament era. Seven of them are in the form of
cuneiform documents: Ur-Nammu, Lipit-Ishtar, Eshnunna, Hammurabi,
Assyrian Laws, Hittite Laws, and Neo-Babylonian Laws. The other two
that are comparable are found in the Bible (Exodus 21:1-22:16;
Deuteronomy 21-25). All nine are remarkably similar in form and
content. All are casuistic in style, dealing with specific cases with
an if… then form.
What is the purpose for such law codes? Some scholars believe they are
more literary than legal. In this view their purpose was never
legislative. They were “royal apologia.” They were to lay before the
public, posterity, future kings, and the gods, evidence of the king's
execution of the divinely ordained mandates. Other scholars say that
the codes are “scribal exercises.” This views Hammurabi more as a
scribe than as a judge. Thus, his work is theoretical literature
designed to illustrate his wisdom. Others understand the law codes to
be from a tradition similar to compiling lists of omens, medical
prognoses, and other scientific treatises. The purpose of these series
was to act as reference works for the royal judges in deciding
difficult cases. This probably began as an oral tradition and
gradually became a systematic written corpus.
Significance The Hammurabi code resembles Hebrew law in form, style,
and general content. Thus some scholars believe the Hebrews were
influenced by Hammurabi's code through the Canaanites among whom they
settled.
Whatever the similarities, important differences are obvious. First,
the Hammurabi code presupposes an aristocratic class system that did
not prevail in Israel. Second, Israel could never have viewed the
state as the custodian of the law. Third, Hebrew law is characterized
by a more humane spirit. Fourth, Hebrew law maintains a high ethical
emphasis. Fifth, the pervading religious fervor makes the Hebrew code
unique. Sixth, Hebrew law is set within a covenant relationship.
Gary D. Baldwin |
Copyright Statement
These dictionary topics are from the Holman Bible Dictionary,
published by Broadman & Holman, 1991. All rights reserved. Used by
permission of Broadman & Holman.
Bibliography Information
Butler, Trent C. Editor.. "Entry for 'HAMMURABI'". "Holman Bible
Dictionary".
<http://www.studylight.org/dic/hbd/view.cgi?number=T2498>. 1991.
|
|