-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8016060819a37b3e707b00b9930daa74.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=SA8GiDnQIB9AVhpbYhwA0aGEF1nU2tHUm-H66Z0vaz8KLck7MBsNp63Ld5PhMPpU-7vrGWwClMWHaKtE61gQArl97EXq%7ENbRtLXrW2qGgKrTIIUG-gKbfl6UJGeN3ZUfEXDs0v82qbdGxgYhsZiqeV94%7EGr-kMXe1JtBniG-Tr19X5NEQKEyj69ixn1otmvNbEUrFn%7E5u-UmTFy8973facrwrHicqwHlnmYyQTtL8HW9LMhCHAI468wLKYMCBgfA3m6z2zxjhjQQYwVravFQcp1WUZpZwTNyYbXUy88wQsL0XumPQBMsRPaECQZQrf3iime6NJnKpcfiCbidORScRA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
04f04d025e64fdac4e5967e575e58296
PDF Text
Text
P.A. EXTRA SERIES.
NATIONAL
The Hammurabi
a_____ _
-4T1E OLDEST LAWS
IN THE
I
WORLD
By CHILPERlC EDWARDS
HAMMURABI ADORING THE SUN-GOD
WATTS & CO.,
17, JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON, E.C.
ISSUED FOR THE RATIONALIST PRESS ASSOCIATION, LIMITED
<0 of this Series is “Religious Persecution
by E. S. P. Haynes
�All Liberal- Thinkers who
have- not already
joined
The RATIONALIST PRESS ASSOCIATION, Ltd.,
ARE EARNESTLY INVITED TO DO SO.
The Objects of the R. P. A. are to stimulate the
habits of reflection and inquiry, and the free exercise
of individual intellect; to promote a rational system
of secular education ; to assist in publishing the works
of capable thinkers, and in popularising the great
discoveries of modern science and scholarship ; to re
issue, in cheap form, notable books of a critical,
philosophical, or ethical character; and generally to
assert the supremacy of reason, as the natural and
necessary means to all such knowledge and wisdom as
man can achieve.
Membership of the R. P. A. can be secured by
payment of an annual subscription of not less than 5s.,
renewable in January of each year ; and the publications
are forwarded, as issued, to each Member to the full
value of his current year’s subscription, unless direc
tions to the contrary are given.
Full Particulars of the R. P. A., including the
latest Annual Report and any special information
desired, can be had gratis by applying to the Secretary,
Charles E. Hooper, 5 & 6, Johnson’s Court, Fleet
Street, London, E.C.
�THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE
WORLD
BEING AN ACCOUNT OF
THE HAMMURABI CODE AND THE SINAITIC LEGISLATION
WITH
A COMPLETE TRANSLATION OF THE GREAT BABYLONIAN
INSCRIPTION DISCOVERED AT SUSA
BY
CHILPERIC EDWARDS
AUTHOR OF “THE WITNESS OF ASSYRIA,” ETC.
{Issued for the Rationalist Press Association, Limited)
WATTS & CO.,
JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON, E.C.
�CONTENTS
CHAP,
PAGE
I. The Discovery
II. The Legal System
III.
Hammurabi Code -
of the
5
-
8
of the
Babylonians
-
-
-
io
IV. The Text of the Inscription
-
-
13
V.
Hammurabi and his Reign
Code
-
-
-
-
33
VI. The Laws of Moses
-
-
-
-
43
Notes
on the
APPENDIX
A. The First Dynasty
B.
of
Babylon
55
Genesis XIV.
C. Relics of Earlier Babylonian Laws
57
-
60
General Index
62
Index
63
to the
Code
�PREFACE
The object of the present work is to provide a complete and careful
translation of the whole of the great Babylonian inscription containing
the Laws of Hammurabi, and to bring together in a brief form all the
known facts connected with the period of Babylonian history to which
it belongs. As, moreover, many persons will be interested in tracing
out the dependence of the Mosaic Laws upon the Babylonian legislation
a chapter has been devoted to that subject. Quite independently,
however, of its service in discounting extravagant claims in regard to
the originality or excellence of the Jewish Pentateuch, the Code of
Hammurabi is destined to be of the utmost value to the student of the
history of civilisation, and the evolution of Semitic Law. It may even
be found eventually that the influence of the Babylonian Code extended
beyond the Semitic boundary, and that it has modified the legal ideas
of distant peoples; but as yet it is too early to verify any such sugges
tion. In any case, however, the age, the extent, and the remarkable
state of preservation of this venerable monument of antiquity combine
to entitle it to the respect and consideration of every thinking being.
Some scholars have claimed that certain of the successors of Ham
murabi bore names which exhibited grammatical forms foreign to the
Semitic-Babylonian tongue; and they have argued that his dynasty must
therefore be of foreign origin. One school is anxious to connect the
line with Northern Arabia, the other with Canaan, and both adduce
linguistic reasons for their choice. Without entering into these pre
carious hypotheses, it may be sufficient to remark that we have no
evidence whatever as to the grammatical peculiarities of the languages
spoken in Arabia or Canaan during the era of Hammurabi—that is to
say, before 2000 b.c. The idioms of Arabic and Hebrew may have
been very different at that early date to what they became in their
classical periods. Furthermore, in most countries proper names exhibit
uncommon or obsolete grammatical forms, for the simple reason that
the names are handed down through several generations, and thus are
really relics of earlier modes of speech; so that the unusual form of
�4
PREFACE
some of the names of Hammurabi’s family may eventually prove to be
of this character, and there will be no excuse for doubting the Babylonian
origin of his race. Leaving such conjectures on one side, however, it
can hardly be disputed that the Laws themselves manifest their specifi
cally Babylonian origin. They contemplate a country with a numerous
settled population, where the art of writing is in common use, where
agriculture is associated with irrigation upon a large scale, and where
ships and navigation play an important part. These points are combined
in no other ancient Semitic land; they can only be referred to Baby
lonia. Mere questions of dynasty are consequently irrelevant. The
legislation is only intelligible as a product of Babylonian soil; and as
Babylonian culture was of ancient date, and was entirely derived from
the still earlier civilisation of the Akkadians, who themselves appear to
have had codes of law (see Appendix C), it seems quite unnecessary to
insist upon the obvious fact that Babylonian jurisprudence is prior to
all other Semitic law or custom of which we have any certain know
ledge.
It will be observed that the ensuing chapters are not besprinkled
with the name of “ Abraham.” The reasons for ignoring this patriarch
are stated in Appendix B.
In regard to the question of chronology, the author has, in Appendix
A, quoted all the evidence that exists for determining the date of Ham
murabi. It will be seen that this evidence does not enable us to fix the
exact year of that monarch; but it is sufficient to indicate the general
period at which he flourished.
C. E.
�THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE WORLD
Chapter I.
THE DISCOVERY OF THE HAMMURABI CODE
Our first introduction to the legal
practice of the ancient Babylonians
was in 1854, when Mr. W. K. Loftus
disinterred a number of clay tablets
from the mound of Tell Sifr, which
covers the remains of some old city
whose name is still unknown. These
tablets were found to be “contracts”—
that is to say, records of business
transactions, effected during the reigns
of three monarchs, Rim-Sin, Hammu
rabi, and Samsu-iluna; but it was many
years before the scholars of Europe
could thoroughly explain these records,
for the cuneiform writing was of a
peculiar type, and the language was
full of unknown technical expressions.
It was not until the Berlin Congress of
Orientalists, in 1882, that Dr. P. Strassmaier gave a really satisfactory ren
dering of them. Meanwhile material
has accumulated. The British Museum
in London, the Louvre at Paris, and
the Museums of Berlin, Constantinople,
and Philadelphia, all contain large col
lections of “ contract tablets,” besides a
great many scattered in private hands.
The efforts of scholars have been chiefly
directed to the elucidation of the his
torical texts, which are not only easier,
but also of more immediate interest;
and the polite literature of the Baby
lonians has also been largely studied
Of late years, however, Babylonian
jurisprudence has been receiving the
attention of a small but enthusiastic
band of workers, among the best known
of whom are the late Dr. Oppert, Dr.
F. E. Peiser, and Dr. Bruno Meissner,
the results of whose labours have been
summarised in an able (though some
what highly coloured) fashion by Pro
fessor G. Maspero in the ninth chapter
of his Dawn of Civilisation (London,
1894).
In the British Museum there are
three or four fragments of tablets from
the library of Assurbanipal, king of
Assyria (668 to 626 b.c.), which
appeared to contain portions of a code
of laws. These fragments had long
been remarked, and had even been
spoken of as the Code of Assurbanipal.
Dr. Meissner, however, who had sub
jected the fragments to considerable
study, was struck by their agreement in
style and language with the remains of
the early Babylonian period; and in
1898 he suggested that the “ Code” to
which these tablets belonged would
probably be found to go back to the
time of the first Babylonian dynasty.
In February, 1899, the celebrated Dr.
Delitzsch, in discussing Meissner’s
�6
THE DISCOVERY OF THE HAMMURABI CODE
remarks,1 wrote as follows:—“That the
collection of laws in question originated
in the period of the first Babylonian
Dynasty is certainly a legitimate as
sumption of Meissner’s. It may further
be conjectured that no other than Ham
murabi himself, the founder of the
Babylonian Empire, gave the command
to unify the laws and ordinances then
current into one Code of Law. Were
the tablets from the library of Assurbanipal complete, they would undoubt
edly be of extreme value for the history
of comparative law.”
This was written in the early part of
1899; and in the course of the article
he called the presumed collection of
Babylonian laws the Code Hammourabi, in allusion to the famous Code
Napoleon, which has had such an
enormous influence upon modern
European Law. Within three years the
conjecture of Dr. Delitzsch was con
verted into a certainty by the discovery
of the complete Code of Laws, with
the original proclamation of King Ham
murabi.
The laurels of this discovery fall to
the French.
In 1897 the French
Government deputed M. J. de Morgan
to open excavations upon the site of
Susa, the ancient city of the Persian
kings, for purposes of historical investi
gation. A day or two before the end
of December, 1901, the workmen came
upon a large fragment of black diorite.
A few days later two other fragments
were unearthed, and the three pieces,
when joined together, were found to
form a round pillar in the shape of an
elongated sugar-loaf, 7ft. 4m. high, 5ft.
4m. in circumference at the top, and
6ft. 2in. at the bottom. The illustra
tion upon the cover shows the upper
part of this pillar, which, it will be seen,
bears a bas-relief 26m. high and 24m.
broad, representing Hammurabi stand
ing in the presence of Shamash, the
Babylonian God of the Sun. The back
and front of the pillar are covered with
columns of writing in what is called the
Archaic Cuneiform character—that is to
say, the ancient Babylonian hierogly
phics executed in wedge-shaped lines.
In the time of Hammurabi this style of
writing was only employed for sculptures
and formal inscriptions. The contract
tablets and the correspondence of the
period wrere written in a simplified style
called the Old Babylonian Cursive, very
similar to the Assyrian Cuneiform
usually met with in printed books. The
clay tablets appear to have been
written and read in horizontal lines,
running from left to right. But the in
scription of Hammurabi is in rows of
short columns, the characters in the
columns being read from top to bottom,
and the columns themselves running
from right to left. In fact, the direction
of the writing is exactly the same as in
Chinese, to which the Archaic Cunei
form bears a certain resemblance. The
hard stone of which the monument is
composed has preserved the original
writing with extreme sharpness, and the
three fragments fit together so closely
that very little is lost by the fractures.
The greatest damage has been done to
the inscription, not by accident, but by
design, for the last five rows of columns
upon the front have been purposely
scraped out. This erasure was not
made because any of the laws were
objected to, but because the monarch
1 “ Zur juristischen Litteratur Babyloniens,”
von Friedrich Delitzsch—Beitrage zur As- who removed the pillar from Babylonia
syriologie, Band iv. (February, 1899), p. 80.
to Susa wished to engrave his own
�THE DISCOVERY OP THE HAMMURABI CODE
name upon it as a trophy of victory.
As that portion of the inscription is now
irretrievably lost, it is a pity that he did
not carry out his design, and thus leave
us a record of the vicissitudes and
wanderings of the monument. We can,
however, form a pretty close guess at
the culprit, for M. de Morgan also
found on the acropolis of Susa no less
than five monuments of Babylonian
kings which had been defaced, and the
name of Shutruk-Nakhunte added upon
them. This individual was king of
Elam about noo b.c. ; and he appears
to have overrun Babylonia and sacked
several important cities. Thus M. de
Morgan had evidently come upon the
museum of Shutruk-Nakhunte, where
that monarch exhibited the trophies he
had brought back from Babylonia in
the shape of the most revered me
morials of the Babylonian sovereigns.
A fragment of another pillar bearing a
few lines of the Code was unearthed
at the same place.
If the Elamite had completed his
design of placing his own name upon
Hammurabi’s pillar, he might have
settled the important question of its
original location. The inscription is
not quite clear upon this point; for
although in the early part of the epi
logue Hammurabi says, “In Bab}Ion
....... in E Saggil........I have written my
precious words upon my pillar; and
before my image as King of Justice I
have placed it ” (xxiv. 63-78), yet at the
end we read of “ the circuit of this
temple of E Babbara ” (xxviii. 76).
Both Sippara and Larsam possessed
temples to the Sun-God, and both
temples bore the name of E Babbara,
“ the House of Light ” (in Semitic, Bit
Uri). The explanation seems to be
that the original Code of Hammurabi
7
was erected at Babylon, in the great
temple of Merodach called E Saggil ;
but copies were placed in other temples,
and this particular pillar, discovered at
Susa, was set up either at Larsam or at
Sippara.
At any rate, after journeying from
Babylon to Susa, the pillar has made a
still longer voyage ; and it now stands
in Paris, as one of the greatest treasures
of the Louvre. The French Govern
ment, recognising the importance of the
find, has had the whole of the text
published in heliogravure, in a mag
nificent volume entitled Textes Elamitiques-Semitiques, par V. Scheil, O.P.
(Paris, 1902), being tome iv. of the
Memoires de la Delegation en Perse.
The eight plates in this volume are so
exquisitely executed as to place scholars
in the same position as if they had the
actual inscription before them. Father
Scheil transcribed the text, and rendered
it into French in the remarkably sh< rt
space of ten months from its discovery.
As already remarked, five rows of
columns are now missing from the baseof the monument; and Father Scheil.
estimates that these contained some
t
thirty-five ordinances. From the re
mains of the Assyrian copies of the
Code in the British Museum, however,,
he has been able to restore three of
these. And it may be of statistical
interest to remark here that the frag
mentary tablets from the Library of
Assurbanipal contain portions of Sec
tions 57, 58, 59, 103, 104, 107, hi,
112, 113, 114, nJ, II9> I2O> 277-280,
according to Father Scheil’s enumera
tion ; and about eighty lines of Ham
murabi’s epilogue.1 The Berlin Museum
1 The latter was only published by the British
Museum authorities at the end of 1901. Proc.
Socy. Bib. Arch., vol. xxiv., p. 304.
�TIIE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE BABYLONIANS
has two small fragments of the Later these fragments are legible, they agree
Babylonian period (about 550 b.c.), con almost exactly with the text of the
taining portions of Sections 147, 148, Susian pillar.
i52j *3>
5
J54, 159. 171- So far as
Chapter II.
THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE BABYLONIANS
In ancient Babylonia the business of
the law was almost exclusively in the
hands of the priesthood, for they in
cluded in their ranks the scribes,
without whom there could be no books
and no records. The halls of justice
were usually at the gates of the temples,
and there the judges, the scribes, and
the “ elders ” assembled. The “ elders ”
appear to have been a permanent body
of officials, for the same names appear
again and again upon tablets of about
the same date; and we may even
recognise a gradual rise, or promotion,
of individuals to higher ranks.1 They
played much the same part as the
“ elders ” of the Old Testament (as,
for instance, Ruth iv. 2, 9), and acted
chiefly as official witnesses to the trans
actions which took place before them.
The judges were appointed by the
sovereign, who exercised a rigid super
vision over them. Their duties were
extremely varied, ranging from the
highest criminal trials to the registration
of business documents. We may see
by the Code that only written deeds
were recognised, and the activity of the
1 Assyrian Deeds and Documents, by the
Rev. C. H. W. Johns, M.A. (Cambridge, 1901),
vol. ii., p. 47, § 76.
courts of registration is evidenced by
the enormous numbers of contract tablets
which are being continually brought to
light. These tablets show the official
hand of the scribe, and are usually
couched in set technical terms. The
nature of the transaction is briefly and
clearly recited; it is stated that the
parties understand the conditions of the
deed, and have taken oath by certain
gods; the deities usually being the
tutelary gods of the land and the city,
accompanied by the name of the reigning
sovereign as their earthly representative
and the supervisor of the law—in some
cases the monarch has even the deter
minative for deity prefixed to his name.
Then follow the names of the elders;
or, as they are usually styled by Assyriologists, the “ witnesses ”; and the docu
ment is completed by the addition of
the date. In later times the year of the
reigning monarch gave the date; but in
the early period, to which Hammurabi
belongs, they dated the contracts by the
most noteworthy incident of the year,
as the building of a temple, an inunda
tion, or a battle. Such a tablet, executed
in clay by one of the attendant scribes,
sometimes further authenticated by seals,
or the thumb-nails of the contracting
�THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE RABYLOXIANS
parties, and baked in a small oven for
better preservation, thus became a legal
record, producible in any court as evi
dence of the transaction.
In actions at law the contending
parties presented themselves at the gate
of the temple. We do not know whether
there was any power of arrest. The
Roman Law of the Twelve Tables
directed the plaintiff to summon the
defendant in the open street, and,
if he did not answer the summons, to
convey him before the judge by force :
but whether a private Babylonian could
do the same is not clear. In the royal
correspondence the king often directs
the apprehension of certain persons and
their conveyance under custody; but
apparently there was no organised police
to undertake such a duty, though there
must have been officials to carry out the
sentences of the courts. When the
parties to the action appeared before
the judges, it was usual for them to
bring with them the object in dispute
and lay it before the god, as in the old
Roman legis actio Sacramento.
*
If the
object were not portable, then it was
represented by a part of it—a clod
of earth would represent an estate, or a
brick a house. Oaths were taken, and
witnesses examined, and the judge gave
his decision, which was usually recorded
upon a tablet, and copies delivered to
the disputants. A few such legal
decisions have been discovered, but
hardly sufficient to give us more precise
details of the practice of the Babylonian
courts. Difficult cases were referred to
special functionaries, or presidents, and
the sovereign was always the ultimate
court of appeal. In fact, any citizen
’ Beifragt turn
Brivatnecbt, von Bruno
Meissner (Leipsic, 1S93).
had the privilege of appealing direct to
the king for justice if he considered
himself to have any legitimate grievance;
and from the correspondence of Ham
murabi it would appear that such appeals
were always treated with consideration.
The letters prove Hammurabi to have
been an impartial judge, who tolerated
no corruption in his officials. Ever
vigilant for the efficient administration
of justice in his realm, he immediately
remitted particulars of any complaint to
the viceroy of the district, with direc
tions to investigate the matter on the
spot, and to send the guilty party to
Babylon for chastisement. In one case
we see him supporting the claim of a
merchant against a s&aMana&u, or
governor, for the repayment of a loan,
so that the king was no respecter of
persons where justice was concerned.
It must not be supposed, however, that
Hammurabi was any exception in this
respect. We have evidence that his
example was followed by his successors,
for there is in the British Museum a
letter in which two men have appealed
to his grandson Abi-eshu’, to the effect
that they cannot obtain justice in
Sippara; arid therefore the king has
immediately ordered the trial of their
case at Babylon/ It may be assumed
that the monarch himself tried the
majority of cases brought before him,
and that he took steps to have his judg
ments carried out. In the cases of
parties living at a distance from the
capital, the king’s decisions were com
municated to the governor of the district
in which the disputants dwelt.
There was thus every provision for the
administration of justice in Babylonia,
1 Tbe Letters ami /nstriftions afHamnmraii,
by L. W. King (London, 1900), vol. iii., p.
�IO
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
and adequate and efficient machinery
was provided for this purpose throughout
the Babylonian dominions. The legal
system was of great antiquity, for we
have contracts, etc., dated in the reigns
of the kings of Ur, who preceded Ham
murabi’s dynasty by many centuries;
and a few laws have been preserved
which, as they are written in the Akka
dian language, must be relics of a very
ancient body of legislation (see Appendix
C). Consequently, although the Code
of Hammurabi was probably a great
advance in Babylonian jurisprudence,
yet the laws themselves were not inno
vations, but a digest of previous custom.
Chapter III.
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
Considering the immense amount that
has been written about Hammurabi
during the last thirty years, it is remark
able how little is really known about
him or his reign. The date when he
lived is quite uncertain, the only approxi
mation to it being derived from two
inscriptions of the Babylonian monarch
Nabonidus, who reigned from 555 to
538 b.c. This king rebuilt the Temple
of the Sun at Sippara; and in his
foundation inscription he tells us that
the edifice had previously been rebuilt
by Shagashalti-Buriash, the son of KudurBel, 800 years before ; that is to say,
about 1350 b.c. Another inscription of
Nabonidus informs us that BurnaBuriash, king of Babylon, rebuilt the
great temple of Ur 700 years after
Hammurabi. Burna-Buriash seems to
have been an earlier monarch than
Shagashalti-Buriash ; but there is nothing
to show what distance of time separated
them. Assuming that it was fifty years
(a very moderate estimate), then Ham
murabi will have preceded ShagashaltiBuriash by 750 years, and have flourished
about 2100 b.c. Most Assyriologists,
however, consider this too late by at
least a century; and further particulars
of the chronology of the period will be
found in Appendix A.
Hammurabi was the sixth member of
what is called the “ First Dynasty of
Babylon.” His five predecessors bore
Semitic Babylonian names. His family
had ruled in the city of Babylon over a
hundred years. It should, therefore, be
unnecessary to add that Hammurabi
was undoubtedly a Semitic Babylonian
by race. The events of his reign are
known chiefly from the dates upon his
contract tablets. In those days people
did not habitually date by any era; they
did not even reckon by the years of the
king’s reign. They recorded each year
by the principal event which happened
in it, whether it were an inundation or a
battle, or the building of a temple or
the excavation of a canal. Information
from such sources is naturally limited in
its character. One event per annum
tells us very little about a monarch’s
reign ; and for a long time we were quite
�HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
ii
in the dark as to the chronological order
of the few events of which records
existed. In 1891, however, Dr. Budge
deposited in the British Museum a
tablet he had acquired in the East,
giving a list of the names of the years
by which contracts were dated; and
when this tablet was published by Dr.
Pinches in 1898 scholars were at last
able to construct something like a con
nected history of Hammurabi and his
ancestors; although the tablet was
badly damaged and only half legible.
Hammurabi’s father, Sin-muballit,
spent the greater part of his twentyyears reign in peace, building city walls,
digging canals, and decorating temples.
But in his fourteenth year he defeated
the army of the city of Ur; in his
seventeenth year he stormed the city of
Isin; and in his twentieth year he
defeated the army of Larsam. He was
then succeeded by his son, Hammurabi.
We know very little of the first thirty
years of the reign of Hammurabi. His
first task appears to have been to tranquillise his dominions, for his second
year is recorded on the contracts as
being “ the year in which Hammurabi
established the heart of the land in
righteousness.”1 For many subsequent
years we have merely fragmentary records
of canals and buildings, etc.; but in his
thirtieth year he began the series of
campaigns which made him master of
the whole of Babylonia; for up to this
time he had only held the northern half,
and his ancestors had merely been rulers
of the city of Babylon and the sur
rounding districts.
At the accession of Hammurabi
Southern Babylonia formed a separate
State, of which the capital was the city
of Larsam. Some years previously the
district had fallen under the dominion
of an Elamite, Kudur-Mabug, the son
of Simti-silkhak. Kudur-Mabug did
not style himself “ king,” but only
prince of Emutbal and Martu (Emutbal
was a borderland between Babylonia
and Elam, while Martu was a name for
Southern Babylonia). His son and
successor, however, called himself “ RimSin, the exalted shepherd of Nippur,
the preserver of Ur, king of Larsam,
king of Sumir and Akkad,” and he
reigned at least thirty-seven years.1 We
learn from the tablet dates that he
rebuilt the cities of Nippur and Ur,
which had evidently been partially
ruined by war; he regulated part of
the channel of the Euphrates and part
of the channel of the Tigris. He
founded (or rebuilt) the city of Kishurra,
and destroyed Duran-ki (which is men
tioned by Hammurabi in connection
with Sippara). This clearly points to
wars with the king of Babylon, probably
Sin-muballit, in which Rim-Sin was
occasionally successful. One of his
dates reads “ the year when Rim-Sin,
the king, the goddess Nintu in the
temple of the city of Kesh called
Te-an-ki-bi-da 1 the dominion of the
world ’ abundantly and mightily elevated,
and the wicked foe against the land did
not fight.” The nakru limnu or “wicked
foe” appears again to be the king of
Babylon. But the great event of the
reign of Rim-Sin was the destruction of
the city of Isin, which we have already
seen was in the possession of Sin-muballit
in his seventeenth year. We have tablets
dated in “the year when, with the
1 The Letters a nd Inscriptions of Hammurabi,
by L. W. King (London, 1900), vol. iii., p. 230.
1 “Die Datenliste der ersten Dynastie von
Babylon,” von Ernst Lindl—Beitrage zur
Assyriologie, Ear.d iv. (1901), p. 3S2.
�I2
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
powerful aid of Anu Bel and Ea, the
royal city of Isin was captured.” Then
“the year after the capture of Isin”;
and so on up to “ the thirtieth year after
the capture of Isin.” This city was an
important one, and its rulers at one time
reigned over the greater part, if not the
whole, of Babylonia. For thirty years,
therefore, no action of Rim-Sin’s is
recorded except the taking of Isin.
In the thirtieth year of Hammurabi
the king of Babylon defeated an army
of Elamites. The next year the people
of Southern Babylonia dated their con
tracts in “the year of Hammurabi, the
king, in which witn the help of Anu and
Bel he established his good fortune, and
his hand cast to the earth the land of
Emutbal, and Rim-Sin, the king.” Evi
dently Anu and Bel had at last proved
false to Rim-Sin, and had transferred
their assistance to his adversary.
Two other royal names appear in
connection with Larsam at this period.
They are Nur-Ramman [or Nur-Adadi]
and his son, Sin-iddinam. Of the
former we know nothing except that a
contract-tablet records an oath by
“ Nannar and king Nur-Ramman”;
there is nothing to show if he were a
temporary antagonist of Rim-Sin or a
vassal king set up by Hammurabi. Of
Sin-iddinam we had a contract-tablet
dated in the year when the temple of
Eridu was finished and decorated with
gold. Also two inscriptions which
recorded the building of a couple of
temples and the construction of a canal.
But a few years ago the diggers in the
mounds of Senkereh (which now cover
the site of Larsam) came across a large
collection of tablets, that are now pre
served partly at Constantinople and
partly at the British Museum, the latter
collection having been published by Dr.
L. W. King. These tablets proved to
be the actual letters which Sin-iddinam
had received from Hammurabi. Evi
dently, after the overthrow of Rim-Sin,
Hammurabi had set up Sin-iddinam as
a vassal-king in Larsam ; and the corre
spondence indicates the complete subor
dination of the latter. Sin-iddinam’s
territory included Larsam, Ur, and
several other cities; and his official title
is given in one of the documents as
Gal Martu—that is, “ Governor of
Martu.”1 This ought to settle the long
controversy as to the exact locality of
Martu, which is thus proved to be
South-western Babylonia.
After a reign of forty-three years
Hammurabi died, and left his dominions
to his son Samsu-iluna.
Whatever more we may learn of his
history in years to come, his greatest
monument will ever be the Code of
Laws which has been so signally re
covered at Susa. This Code must have
been promulgated late in his career, for
in the introduction to it he refers to
Eridu, Erech, Ur, Larsam, and other
cities that did not fall into his posses
sion until his thirty-first year; and in
two passages of the epilogue he alludes
to his advanced age. The extension of
his territories had evidently forced upon
him the necessity of establishing a
uniform system of law as the surest
method of organising and consolidating
his kingdom; and the next chapter will
give a complete translation of this
remarkable inscription.
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, vol. iii.,
p. 169.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
13
Chapter IV.
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
When Anu, the supreme, the king of
the Anunnaki, and Bel, the lord of
heaven and earth, who fixes the destiny
of the universe, had allotted the multi
tudes of mankind to Merodach, the
first-born of Ea, the divine master of
Law, they made him great among the
Igigi; they proclaimed his august name
in Babylon, exalted in the lands, they
established for him within it an eternal
kingdom whose foundations, like heaven
and earth, shall endure.
Then Anu and Bel delighted the flesh
of mankind by calling me, the renowned
prince, the god-fearing Hammurabi, to
establish justice in the earth, to destroy
the base and the wicked, and to hold
back the strong from oppressing the
feeble: to shine like the Sun-god upon
the black-headed men, and to illuminate
the land.
Hammurabi, the elect shepherd of
Bel, am I, dispenser of riches and
abundance, completing all things in
Nippur and Duranki, generous provider
of E Kur.
The hero king who has restored
Eridu to its original state, purifier of
the cult of E Absu.
Invader of the Four Quarters, exalter
of the fame of Babylon, rejoicer of the
heart of his lord, Merodach, whom he
daily serves in E Saggil.
The royal offspring created by Sin,
who loads the city of Ur with blessings,
the humble suppliant who brings abun
dance to E Nernugal.
The prudent king, favoured of Sha
mash the powerful, the founder of
Sippara, who has clothed with verdure
the cenotaphs of Malkat; builder of
E Babbar like heaven’s throne.
Avenging warrior of Larsam, restorer
of E Babbar for the glory of Shamash,
his helper.
The prince who has given life to
Erech by bringing abundant waters to
its inhabitants, who has raised the head
of E Anna, who has shaken out abun
dance over Anu and Nana.
The protector of the land, who has
reassembled the dispersed citizens of
Isin, who has made riches to abound in
E Galmakh.
Guardian king of the city, brother of
the god Zamama, who has established
the colony of Kish, who has enveloped
E Meie-ursag with splendour. Decorator
of the great sanctuaries of Nana, sacris
tan of E Kharsagkalama.
The grave of the foe, by whose help
victory is attained, who has enlarged
Kutha, and amplified everything in
E Shidlam.
The impetuous bull that overthrows
the enemy, the darling of Tutu, the
desire of Borsippa ; the august, the
tireless for E Zida.
The divine urban king, the wise, the
prudent, who has expanded the planta
tions of Dilbat, who has accumulated
corn for Ninip, the mighty.
Possessor of sceptre and crown, whom
the wise Mama has created, who has set
out the boundary of Kesh, who lavishes
holy food for Nintu.
�x4
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
The far-seeing one, who has carefully
provided pasture and drinking-places for
Shirpurla and Girsu, who has made
rich offerings to E L.
The taker of enemies, the chosen of
Telitim, accomplisher of the oracles of
Khallabi, who rejoices the heart of
Anunit.
The pure prince whose prayers are
heard by Adad, who contents the heart
of Adad the warrior in Karkar, who has
set out the vessels of E Udgalgal.
The king who has given life to Adab,
the prelate of the temple of E Makh.
The royal prince of the city, wrestle
without rival, who has given life to
Mashkanshabri, who has made [the
temple of] Shidlam drink of abundance.
The wise, the active, who has struck
down the bandits, who has sheltered the
people of Malka during troubles, and
has established their habitations in abun
dance. Who has instituted pure offerings
for ever for Ea and Damgalnunna, because
they have exalted his sovereignty.
The royal ruler of the city who has
subjugated the districts on the river
Euphrates, by the power of Dagan, his
creator, who has rewarded the men of
Mera and of Tutul.
The renowned potentate, who has
made the face of Nana to shine, who
has placed pure food before Ninazu, who
fills his people during dearth, and assures
them their goods in peace in the suburbs
of Babylon.
The shepherd of men, the servant
who pleases Anunit, who installed Anunit
in E Ulmash in the suburbs of Agade.
The promulgator of justice, the guider
of the people, who has restored its
tutelary deity to Assur.
The crusher of enemies, who has
glorified the name of Nana [Ishtar] in
Nineveh in E Dupdup.
The exalted one, who humbles him
self before the great gods, the descendant
of Sumula-ilu, the mighty son of Sinmuballit, the eternal scion of royalty,
the powerful king, the sun of Babylon,
beaming light over Sumir and Akkad,
the king who is obeyed in the four
quarters, the darling of Nana am I.
When Merodach had instituted me
governor of men, to conduct and to
direct, Right and Justice I established
in the land, for the good of the people.
r. If a man has laid a curse upon
another man, and it is not justified, the
layer of the curse shall be slain.
2. If a man has thrown a spell upon
another man, and it is not justified, he
who has suffered the spell shall proceed
to the holy river: into the holy river
shall he plunge. If the holy river seize
him, the layer of the spell shall take his
house. If the holy river holds him
guiltless, and he remains unharmed, the
layer of the spell shall be slain. He
that plunged into the holy river shall
take the house of the layer of the spell.
3. If in a lawsuit a man gives damna
tory evidence, and his word that he has
spoken is not justified; then, if the suit
be a capital one, that man shall be slain.
4. If he has given evidence concerning
corn or silver; then, whatever the penalty
of that lawsuit, he shall suffer it.
5. If a judge has heard a case, and
given a decision, and delivered a written
verdict, and if afterwards his case be
disproved, and that judge be convicted
as the cause of the misjudgment; then
shall he pay twelve times the penalty
awarded in that case. In public assembly
he shall be thrown from the seat of
judgment; he shall not return ; and he
shall not sit with the judges upon a case.
6. If a man steal the goods of a god,
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
or a palace, that man shall be slain.
And whoever receives the booty at his
hand shall be slain also.
7. If a man has bought silver, or
gold, or man slave, or woman slave, or
ox, or sheep, or ass, or anything else,
from the hands of a child, or slave of
another man, without elder or contract,
or receives them on deposit, that man
shall be considered a thief: he shall be
slain.
8. If a man has stolen an ox, or a
sheep, or an ass, or a pig, or a boat,
either from a god or a palace, he shall
pay thirty-fold. If he is a plebeian, he
shall render ten-fold. If the thief has
nothing to pay, he shall be slain.
9. If a man has lost anything, and
finds it in the hands of another ; if the
holder says, “ A seller sold it me ; before
the elders I bought it.” And if the
claimant says, “ I can produce witnesses
who will recognise my property.” Then
the purchaser shall bring the vendor who
gave it him, and the elders before whom
he bought it; and the claimant the wit
nesses recognising his lost property.
The judge shall weigh their evidence.
The elders before whom the purchase
was made, and the witnesses recognising
the property, shall affirm before God
what they know. The seller shall be
held for a thief, and slain : the claimant
shall receive back his lost property ; and
the purchaser shall receive back the
money he paid from the house of the
seller.
10. If the purchaser has not produced
the seller from whom he received it, and
the elders before whom he bought it;
but the claimant has brought witnesses
recognising the property; then the pur
chaser shall be held for a thief, and
slain; and the owner shall take his lost
property.
11. If the claimant has not brought
his witnesses recognising the property,
he has acted in bad faith, he has calum
niated ; he shall be slain.
12. If the seller has gone to his fate,
then from his house the purchaser shall
claim five-fold as the penalty in the
case.
13. If that man has not the elders at
hand, the judge shall give him a time,
up to six months. If in six months his
witnesses do not appear, he has acted in
bad faith; the penalty of that case he
shall bear.
14. If a man has stolen a man’s son
under age, he shall be slain.
15. If a man has brought a male or
female slave of the palace, or the male
or female slave of a plebeian, to pass
out of the gate, he shall be slain.
16. If a man has harboured in his
house a fugitive male or female slave of
the palace, or of a plebeian; and has
not brought them to the order of the
commandant, that householder shall be
slain.
17. If a man has seized in the field a
fugitive slave, male or female, and has
brought him back to his lord, the owner
of the slave shall pay him two shekels of
silver.
18. If that slave will not name his
owner, to the palace he shall be brought,
his past shall be investigated, to his lord
he shall be delivered.
19. If that slave be hidden in his
house, and be arrested in his hands, that
man shall be slain.
20. If a slave has escaped from the
hand of his captor, the latter shall swear
by the name of God to the owner of the
slave, and shall be guiltless.
21. If a man has broken into a house,
before the breach shall he be slain, and
there buried.
�i6
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
22. If a man has perpetrated brigan his house, and works them for three
dage, and has been caught, that man years ; if he returns and desires to till
shall be slain.
his field, his garden, and his house, they
23. If the brigand has not been taken, shall not be given him. He that has
the man plundered shall claim before taken and worked them shall continue
God what he has lost; and the city and to use them.
sheriff in whose land and boundary the
31. If one year only he had neglected
theft has taken place shall restore to them, and he returns ; field, garden, and
him all that he has lost.
house shall be restored to him, and he
24. If a life, the city and sheriff shall shall work them.
pay one mina of silver to his people.
32. If a captain or a soldier has been
25. If a fire break out in a man’s taken prisoner on “ the way of the king,”
house, and another man has gone to and a merchant ransoms him, and brings
extinguish it, and has lifted his eyes him back to his city; then, if his house
upon the goods of the householder, and contain sufficient for his ransom, he
has taken the goods of the householder; personally shall pay for his liberation.
that man shall be thrown into the same If his house do not contain sufficient,
the temple of his city shall pay. If the
fire.
26. If a captain or a soldier has been temple of his city have not the means,
ordered upon “ the way of the king,” the palace shall ransom him. His field,
and has not gone, but has hired a sub his garden, and his house shall not be
|
stitute, that captain or soldier shall be given for his ransom.
33. If a prefect or a general permits
f
slain. The substitute shall take his
evasion of service, and accepts a hired
I
house.
27. If a captain or a soldier has been mercenary to go on “ the way of the king,” I
1
taken in a “ misfortune of the king,” that prefect or general shall be slain.
34. If a prefect or a general has taken I f
and his field and garden have been
given to another to administer; when he away the property of a captain, has i g.
returns and regains his city, he shall injured a captain, has given a captain II &
receive back his field and garden and for hire, has abandoned the captain to a I
superior in a lawsuit, or taken away from 11
shall administer them.
28. If a captain or a soldier has been the captain a gift of the king, that prefect I
I
taken in a “ misfortune of the king,” or general shall be slain.
35. If any man purchase cattle or g iq
and his son can work them; field and
garden shall be given him, and the affairs sheep that the king has given to a captain, I
he shall lose his money.
i
of his father he shall administer.
36. Neither field, nor garden, nor Iron'
29. If his son be under age, and
unable to administer his father’s affairs ; house of a captain, or soldier, or vassal I fsgaj
I
then a third part of the field and garden shall be sold separately for silver.
37. If a man has bought the field,
shall be given to his mother, and his
garden, or house of a captain, a soldier, j wjjg
mother shall bring him up.
30. If a captain or a soldier has or a vassal, his contract-tablet shall be pd 7
neglected his field, his garden, and his broken, his money shall be forfeited,
house, instead of working them; and and the field, garden, or house shall be
another takes his field, his garden, and returned to the owner.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
38. A captain, a soldier, or a vassal
may not assign his field, or garden, or
house to his wife or his daughter; neither
can they be assigned for debt.
39. He may bequeath in writing to
his wife or daughter a field, a garden, or
a house that he may have bought, and
may assign it for debt.
40. But he may sell his field, his
garden, or his house to a merchant or
another official; and the purchaser may
work the field, garden, or house that he
has bought.
41. If a man has enclosed the field,
garden, or house of a captain, soldier, or
vassal, and has provided the stakes; if
the captain, soldier, or vassal returns into
the field, garden, or house, he shall pay
for the stakes that have been provided.
42. If a man take a field to farm, and
grows no corn on the field, he shall be
accused of neglecting to work the field;
and he shall give to the lord of the field
an amount of corn according to the
yield of the district.
43. If he has not cultivated the field,
but has let it lie fallow, he shall give
corn like its neighbour to the lord of
the field. And the field that lay fallow
he shall hoe and sow, and to the lord of
the field restore it.
44. If a man lease unreclaimed land
for three years for cultivation, but has
been lazy and has not worked the field;
in the fourth year he shall break up the
field, hoe it, and sow it, and to the lord
of the field restore it. And he shall
measure out to him ten gur of corn for
each ten gan.
45. If a man has let his field to a
cultivator for a rental, and has received
the rental; and if afterwards the god
Adad \i.e., a thunderstorm] has flooded
the field and destroyed the harvest, the
loss is to the cultivator.
*7
46. If he has not received the rental
of his field, or has let it for one-half or
one-third of the crop; then the cultivator
and the lord of the field shall take their
proportions of the corn that is left in the
field.
47. If the cultivator, because he had
made no profit in the preceding year,
has sub-let the field for tillage, the lord
of the field cannot condemn the culti
vator. His field has been tilled, and at
the harvest he shall take corn according
to his contract.
48. If a man is liable for interest,
and the god Adad has flooded his field,
or the harvest has been destroyed, or
the corn has not grown through lack of
water; then in that year he shall not
pay corn to his creditor. He shall dip
his tablet in water, and the interest of
that year he shall not pay.
49. If a man has received silver from
a trader, and has given to the trader a
cornfield or sesame field, saying “Plant
the field with corn or sesame; take and
reap whatever there is,” then, when the
cultivator has grown corn or sesame on
the field, the lord of the field shall take
corn or sesame, whatever is upon the
field at the harvest; and shall give to
the trader corn for the silver he has
received from the trader, and for its
interest; and sustenance for the culti
vator.
50. If an already planted field, or a
field already planted with sesame, has
been given; the lord of the field shall
take the corn or sesame which is in the
field, and he shall render silver and
interest to the trader.
51. If he has not silver to pay back,
he shall give to the trader sesame accord
ing to the value of the silver he has
received, with its interest, at the royal
tariff.
c
�i8
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
52. If the cultivator has not grown
corn or sesame in the field, his contract
shall not be annulled.
53. If a man has been too lazy to
strengthen his dyke, and has not
strengthened the dyke, and a breach
has opened in the dyke, and the ground
has been flooded with water; the man
in whose dyke the breach has opened
shall reimburse the corn he has destroyed.
54. If he has not corn to reimburse,
he and his goods shall be sold for silver,
and it shall be divided among those
whose corn has been destroyed.
55. If a man has opened his irrigation
ditch, and, through negligence, his
neighbour’s field is flooded with water,
he shall measure back corn according to
the yield of the district.
56. If a man has opened the waters,
and flooded the planted field of his
neighbour, he shall measure back ten
gur of corn for each ten gan.
If a shepherd has put his sheep
to grass without an understanding with
the lord of the field; and, unknown to
the lord of the field, it has been grazed
by the sheep; then the lord shall reap
his field, and the shepherd who has
grazed his sheep unknown to the lord of
the field shall pay to the latter in addi
tion twenty gur of corn for every ten
gan.
58. If, after the sheep have left the
pasture, and been folded by the gate, a
shepherd allows his sheep to remain in
the field and graze; then that shepherd
shall take that field which has been
grazed, and at the harvest he shall
measure sixty gur of corn for each ten
gan to the lord of the field.
59. If a man, unknown to the lord of
the orchard, has cut down a tree in
another man’s orchard, he shall pay half
a mina of silver.
60. If a man has leased a field to a
gardener to be converted into a garden,
and the gardener has planted it; for
four years he shall attend to it; in the
fifth year the lord of the orchard and
the gardener shall share equally. The
lord of the orchard shall choose his
share and take it.
61. If the gardener has not planted
all the field, but leaves a waste, the waste
shall be put in his portion.
62. If the field entrusted to him has
not been planted as a garden, but is
cornland; the gardener shall measure
back to the lord of the field the produce
of the field according to the yield of the
vicinity during the years he has neglected
it. And he shall prepare the field and
return it to the lord.
63. If it be waste land, he shall pre
pare it, and restore it to the lord of the
field, and he shall measure ten gur of
corn per ten^zz/z for each year.
64. If a man has leased an orchard
to a gardener to cultivate it; the gardener,
as long as he holds it, shall give twothirds of the produce to the lord of the
orchard, one-third he shall keep himself.
65. If the gardener has not cultivated
the orchard, and the crop has diminished;
the gardener shall measure out according
to the yield of the vicinity.
[Five rows of cuneiform columns have
here been erased. It is estimated that
some thirty-five sections have thus been
obliterated. The British Museum, how
ever, possesses two fragments of clay
tablets brought from the library of the
Assyrian king Assurbanipal (reigned
668-626 B.c.) at Nineveh, which are
the remains of copies of the Code.
From these tablets the following three
sections have been restored :—
a. If a man has received silver from
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
a trader, and has pledged his date-garden
to him, saying, “ The dates in my garden
take for thy silver,” and the trader has
not consented; then the lord of the
garden shall gather the dates which are
in the garden : the silver and its interest
according to the tenour of his tablet he
shall pay to the trader; and the remainder
of the dates which are found in the
garden shall be taken by the lord of the
garden.
b. If a tenant has paid to the landlord
his full rent for a year, and the landlord
orders the tenant to go out before the
days are completed, then because the
tenant has not completed his days, and
has left the house, the landlord shall
return the silver which the tenant has
paid him.
c. If a man owes corn or silver, but
has neither corn nor silver to pay with,
then shall he produce before the elders
whatever property he has in his hands :
to the trader he shall give it. The trader
must accept it, and must not refuse.]
ioo.......... interest for the silver, as
much as he has received, he shall write
down; they shall reckon his days, and
he shall pay to his trader.
101. If in the place where he has
gone he has found no opportunity, the
retailer shall give back in equal amount
to the trader.
102. If a trader has lent silver to a
retailer for an undertaking, and where
he has gone he has suffered loss, he
shall return the capital sum to the
trader.
103. If the enemy has taken from
him whatever he carries upon the road,
the retailer shall swear by the name of
God, and shall be absolved.
104. If a trader has entrusted corn,
wool, oil, or any other goods to a retailer
to trade with, the retailer shall write
t-9
down the price and give it to the trader.
Thus shall the retailer take back the
seal of the silver which shall be given to
the trader.
105. If the retailer is negligent, and
the seal of the silver has not been given
to the trader, the silver that is not sealed
shall not be carried to account.
106. If a retailer has received silver
from a trader, and disputes with the
trader; then the trader shall call the
retailer before God and the elders,
regarding the silver received; and the
retailer shall restore three-fold the silver
he has received.
107. If a trader has wronged a retailer,
and the retailer has repaid to the trader
all that the trader gave him, and the
trader contests what has been given to
him; then that retailer shall call the
trader before God and the elders; and
because the trader has contested with
his retailer, he shall pay to the retailer
six-fold of all that he has received.
108. If a (female) wine-seller has not
accepted corn as the price of drink, but
silver by the grand weight has accepted,
and the price of drink is below the
price of corn; then that wine-seller
shall be prosecuted, and thrown into the
water.
109. If rebels meet in the house of a
wine-seller and she does not seize them
and take them to the palace, that wine
seller shall be slain.
no. If a priestess who has not
remained in the sacred building shall
open a wine-shop, or enter a wine-shop
for drink, that woman shall be burned.
hi. If a wine-seller has given sixty
qa of usakani for refreshment, at the
harvest she shall receive fifty qa of corn.
112. If a man goes on a journey and
gives to another man silver, gold, gems,
or portable goods, that they may be
�20
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
carried home, and that man has not
carried and delivered all that was given
him to carry, but has kept them; then
the owner shall prosecute that man for
all the things carried, but not delivered,
and that man shall pay five-fold to the
owner for all that was given him.
113. If a man has a claim for corn or
silver upon another man, and without
the knowledge of the owner has taken
corn from the granary or store; that
man, because he has taken corn from
the granary or store without the know
ledge of the owner, shall be prosecuted.
The corn he has taken shall be returned,
and all that he should have received he
shall lose.
114. If a man has no claim upon
another man for corn or silver, but
levies distraint upon him, for each dis
traint he shall pay one-third of a mina
of silver.
115. If a man has a claim upon
another man for corn or silver, and takes
distraint, if the distrained go to his fate
in the house of the distrainer [by a
natural death], then that case has no
further claim.
116. If the distrained die in the
house of the distrainer through blows
or ill-treatment, the distrainer shall call
his trader to account. If he be free
born, his son shall be slain; if a slave,
he shall pay a third of a mina of silver;
and all that he should have received he
shall lose.
117. If a man has contracted a debt,
and has given his wife, his son, his
daughter for silver or for labour, three
years they shall serve in the house of
their purchaser or bondsmaster; in the
fourth year they shall regain their original
condition.
118. If he has assigned a male or
female slave for labour, and the trader
sends them out, and sells them for silver,
there is no claim.
119. If a man has contracted a debt,
and has sold for silver a slave who has
borne him children; the lord of the
slave shall pay back the silver the trader
has given him, and the slave shall be
free.
120. If a man has stored his corn in
the house of another man, and the store
has been damaged, or the householder
has opened the granary taking corn, or
he disputes the quantity of the corn
heaped up, then the owner of the corn
shall pursue his corn before God, and
the householder who has taken the corn
shall replace it and give it to the owner.
121. If a man has stored corn in the
house of another man, he shall pay five
qa of corn per gur per annum for ware
housing.
122. If a man desires to deposit with
another man silver, gold, or anything
else, he shall exhibit all before the elders,
draw up a contract, and then make the
deposit.
123. If he has given on deposit with
out elders or contract, and where he has
given they contest it, there is no claim.
124. If a man has deposited silver or
gold or anything else with another man
before the elders, and if that man denies
it, he shall prosecute him, and all that
he contests he shall replace and restore
double.
125. If a man has given his goods
on deposit, and in the place of deposit,
either by breaking in or by climbing
over, anything has been lost, together
with property of the householder; then
the householder in question shall make
good all that was deposited with him
and lost, and shall restore it to the
owner. The householder shall pursue his
stolen goods and recover from the thief.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
126. If a man has not lost everything,
but says everything of his is lost, exag
gerating what is lacking; then, as he
has not lost everything, his lack he shall
bring before God. All that he sub
stantiates shall be made up; what he
lacks shall be restored.
127. If a man has pointed the finger
against a priestess or the wife of another
man unjustifiably, that man shall be
thrown before the judge, and his brow
shall be branded.
128. If a man take a wife, and a
contract has not concluded, then that
woman is no wife.
129. If the wife of a man is found
lying with another male, they shall be
bound and thrown into the water; unless
the husband lets his wife live, and the
king lets his servant live.
130. If a man has forced the wife of
another man, who has not known the
male, and who still resides in the house
of her father, and has lain within her
breasts, and he is found, that man shall
be slain; that woman is guiltless.
131. If a man’s wife is accused by
her husband, but has not been found
lying with another male, she shall swear
by the name of God and return into her
house.
132. If the finger is pointed against a
man’s wife because of another male, and
she has not been found lying with
another male; then she shall plunge for
her husband into the holy river.
133. If a man has been taken prisoner,
and there is food in his house, and his
wife forsakes his house, and enters the
house of another; then because that
woman has not preserved her body, but
has entered another house, then that
woman shall be prosecuted, and shall be
thrown into the water.
134. If a man has been taken prisoner,
21
and there is no food in his house, and
his wife enters the house of another;
then that woman bears no blame.
135. If a man has been taken prisoner,
and there is no food before her, and his
wife has entered the house of another,
and bears children, and afterwards her
husband returns and regains his city;
then that woman shall return to her
spouse. The children shall follow their
father.
136. If a man has abandoned his
city, and absconded, and after that his
wife has entered the house of another;
if that man comes back and claims his
wife; because he had fled and deserted
his city, the wife of the deserter shall
not return to her husband.
137. If a man has set his face to
divorce a concubine who has borne him
children, or a wife who has presented
him with children; then he shall give
back to that woman her dowry, and he
shall give her the usufruct of field,
garden, and property, and she shall
bring up her children. After she has
brought up her children, she shall take
a son’s portion of all that is given to
her children, and she may marry the
husband of her heart.
138. If a man divorce his spouse who
has not borne him children, he shall give
to her all the silver of the bride-price,
and restore to her the dowry which she
brought from the house of her father;
and so he shall divorce her.
139. If there were no bride-price, he
shall give her one mina of silver for the
divorce.
140. If he be a plebeian, he shall
give her one-third of a mina of silver.
141. If a man’s wife, dwelling in a
man’s house, has set her face to leave,
has been guilty of dissipation, has
wasted her house, and has neglected her
�22
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
husband; then she shall be prosecuted.
If her husband says “she is divorced,” he
shall let her go her way; he shall give
her nothing for divorce. If her husband
says “she is not divorced,” her husband
may espouse another woman, and that
woman shall remain a slave in the house
of her husband.
142. If a woman hate her husband,
and say “ Thou shalt not possess me,”
the reason for her dislike shall be
inquired into. If she is careful, and
has no fault, but her husband takes
himself away and neglects her; then
that woman is not to blame. She shall
take her dowry and go back to her
father's house.
143. If she has not been careful, but
runs out, wastes her house and neglects
her husband; then that woman shall be
thrown into the water.
144. If a man has married a wife, and
that wife has given to her husband a
female slave who has children; then if
that man has set his face to marry a
concubine, he shall not be permitted;
he shall not marry a concubine.
145. If a man has married a wife and
she has not presented him with children,
and he has set his face to marry a con
cubine ; if that man marries a concubine
and brings her into his house, then that
concubine shall not rank with the wife.
146. If a man has married a wife, and
she has given to her husband a female
slave, who bears children; and after
wards that slave ranks herself with her
mistress, because she has borne children,
her mistress shall not sell her for silver.
She shall be fettered, and counted
among the slaves.
147. If she has not borne children,
her mistress shall sell her for silver.
148. If a man has married a wife,
and sickness has seized her, and he has
set his face to marry another; he may
marry; but his wife whom the sickness
has seized he shall not divorce. She
shall dwell in the house he has built,
and he shall support her while she lives.
149. If that woman is not content to
dwell in the house of her husband, he
shall return to her the dowry she brought
from her father’s house, and she shall go.
150. If a man has given to his wife
field, garden, house, or goods, and has
given her a sealed tablet; then after her
husband [has gone to his fate] her chil
dren have no claim. The mother can
give what she leaves behind to the chil
dren she prefers. To brothers she shall
not give.
151. If a woman who dwells in a
man’s house has bound her husband
not to assign her to a creditor, and has
received a tablet; then if that man had
a debt upon him before he married that
woman, his creditor may not seize his
wife. And if that woman had incurred
debt before she entered the man’s house,
her creditor may not seize her husband.
152. If, after that woman has entered
the man’s house, they incur debt, both
of them must satisfy the trader.
153. If a man’s wife, because of
another male, has killed her husband,
that woman shall be impaled upon a
stake.
154. If a man has known his daughter,
that man shall be banished from his
city.
155. If a man has betrothed a bride
to his son, and his son has known
her; and afterwards he has lain in her
breasts, and he is found; that man shall
be bound and thrown into the water.
156. If a man has betrothed a bride
to his son, and his son has not known
her, and he has lain in her breasts, he
shall pay half a mina of silver; and all
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
that she brought from her father’s house
shall be returned to her, and she may
marry the husband of her heart.
157. If a man after his father has lain
in the breasts of his mother, both of
them shall be burned.
158. If a man after his father is dis
covered in the breasts of his lady, who
has borne children, that man shall be
cut off from his father’s house.
159. If a man has brought goods into
the house of his father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and has looked
upon another woman, and has said
to his father-in-law, “ Thy daughter
I will not marry”; then the father of
the girl shall retain all that has been
brought.
160. If a man has brought goods into
the house of the father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and the father of
the girl says, “ I will not give thee my
daughter”; he shall equal all that has
been brought him and repay it.
161. If a man has brought goods into
the house of his father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and his friend has
slandered him, and the father-in-law has
said to the husband of the wife, “ My
daughter thou shalt not marry ”; he shall
equal all that has been brought him and
repay it; and his wife shall not marry
his friend.
162. If a man has married a wife,
and she has borne children, and that
woman has gone to her fate; then her
father has no claim upon her dowry.
The dowry is her children’s.
163. If a man has married a wife,
and she has presented no children to
him, and that woman has gone to her
fate; if the bride-price which that man
brought to the house of his father in
law has been returned to him by his
father-in-law, then the husband has no
23
claim upon that woman’s dowry. The
dowry is to her father’s house.
164. If his father-in-law has not re
turned the bride-price in her dowry;
then he shall deduct all her bride-pr^e,
and shall give back her dowry to her
father’s house.
165. If a man has made a gift of
field, or garden, or house, to his son,
the first in his eyes, and has sealed him
a tablet; then, after the father has gone
to his fate, when the brothers divide he
shall retain the father’s present which
he has given him over and above the
equal part that he shares in the posses
sions of his paternal house.
166. If a man has married wives to
the children he has had, but has not
married a wife to an infant son; then
after the father has gone to his fate,
when the brethren share the possessions
of the paternal house, they shall give
silver for a bride-price to their infant
brother who has not married a wife,
besides his share; and he shall be
married to a wife.
167. If a man has married a wife, and
she has borne him children, and that
woman has gone to her fate; and after
her he has married another woman who
bears him children; then, after the
father has gone to his fate, the children
shall not share according to the mothers;
but they shall take the dowries of their
own mothers. The possessions of their
paternal house they shall share equally.
168. If a man has set his face to
disown his son, and has said to the
judge, “I disown my son,” then the
judge shall look into his reasons. If the
son has not borne a heavy crime which
would justify his being disowned from
filiation, then the father shall not disown
his son from filiation.
169. If he has borne against his
�24
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
father a heavy crime justifying his being leave the house, the judge shall look
disowned from filiation, then for his into the reasons ; and if the children be
first offence he shall turn aside his face. in fault, that woman shall not leave her
If he bear a heavy crime the second husband’s house.
time, the father shall disown his son
172Z. If that woman has set her face
from filiation.
to depart, she shall surrender to her
170. If a man whose spouse has
children the settlement which her hus
borne him children, and whose female band made her. She shall retain the
slave has borne him children, and the dowry from her father’s house, and she
father in his lifetime has said to the may marry the husband of her heart.
children of the female slave “ my
173. If that woman where she has
children,” and has counted them with gone bears children to her later husband,
the children of his spouse, and after and afterwards the woman dies; her
that the father has gone to his fate; former and her latter children shall
then the children of the spouse and the share her dowry.
children of the female slave shall share
174. If she bears no children to her
the possessions of the paternal house later husband, the children of her former
equally. The sons that are children of consort take her dowry.
the wife shall choose and allot in the
175. If either a palace slave, or the
division.
slave of a plebeian, marry the daughter
171a. And if the father in his lifetime of a free man, and she bears children;
has not said to the children whom the the owner of the slave has no claim for
female slave has borne him “ my chil service upon the children of the free
dren,” and afterwards the father has man’s daughter.
gone to his fate; the children of the
176a. And if a palace slave or slave
female slave shall not share with the of a plebeian marry the daughter of a
children of the spouse; but the slave free man, and when she marries she
and her children shall be emancipated, enters the house of the palace slave or
and the children of the spouse shall the plebeian’s slave with a dowry from
have no claim for service upon the chil the house of her father; and when they
dren of the slave.
are settled and have founded a house
171Z'. The spouse shall take her they have acquired property, and after
dowry, and the settlement which her wards the palace slave or the slave of
husband made her and wrote in a tablet the plebeian has gone to his fate; then
for her, and she shall dwell in the the daughter of the free man shall take
domicile of her husband. While she her dowry; and all that her husband
lives she shall enjoy it; she may not and herself have acquired since they
sell it for silver, but after her it is her settled shall be divided into two parts;
children’s.
the owner of the slave shall take half,
172a. If her husband has not made and the free man’s daughter shall take
her a settlement, her dowry shall be half for her children.
returned to her, and she shall receive a
176A If the free man’s daughter had
portion of the possessions of her no dowry; all that her husband and
husband’s house equal to that of a son. herself have acquired since they settled
If her children annoy her, to make her shall be divided into two parts: the
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
owner of the slave shall take half, and
the free man’s daughter shall take half
for her children.
177. If a widow who has infant
children has set her face to enter a
second house, she shall not enter with
out [consent] of the judge. When she
would enter the second house the
judge shall inquire into the residue of
her former husband’s house. The house
of her former husband and that woman
shall be entrusted to the house of her
later husband, and a tablet shall be
delivered to them. They shall maintain
the house and bring up the infants.
They may sell nothing for silver. The
purchaser who buys any vessel belonging
to the widow’s children shall lose his
silver, and the property shall return to
its owner.
178. If a priestess, or a devotee, her
father has given her a dowry, and has
written a tablet; but has not written in
the tablet that what she leaves behind
her she may give as she sees good, and
has not allowed the fulness of her heart;
and afterwards the father has gone to
his fate; then her brothers shall take
her field or her garden, and according
to the value of her share they shall give
her corn, oil, and wool, and her heart
shall be satisfied. If her brothers have
not given her corn, oil, and wool
according to the value of her share, and
her heart is not satisfied, then her field
or her garden shall be entrusted to the
cultivator whom she sees good, and her
cultivator shall sustain her. While she
lives she shall enjoy field and garden
and everything which her father has
given her; but she may not sell for
silver nor alienate to another. Her
filiation is to her brothers.
179. If a priestess or devotee her
father has given her a dowry, and has
25
written a deed, and has written in the
tablet that what she leaves behind her
she may give as she sees good, and has
allowed the fulness of her heart; then after
her father has gone to his fate she may
give what she leaves behind to whom
she sees good. Her brothers have no
claim.
180. If the father has not given a,
dowry to his daughter who is a Kallati
or a devotee ; then after the father has
gone to his fate, she shall take out of
the possessions of the paternal house
the portion of one son. She shall enjoy
it during her life.
What she leaves
behind is to her brothers.
181. If the father has consecrated a
Qadishtu or a virgin to God, and has
not given her a dowry; after the father
has gone to his fate she shall take out
of the possessions of the paternal house
one-third of the portion of a son. She
shall enjoy it during her life. What
she leaves behind is to her brothers.
182. If the father has not given a
dowry to his daughter, a “ wife of Merodach of Babylon,” and not written a
deed ; then after the father has gone to
his fate she shall take out of the
possessions of the paternal house onethird of the portion of a son with her
brothers. She shall not have the man
agement. The “ wife of Merodach ”
may give what she leaves behind to
whom she sees good.
183. If the father has provided a
dowry for his daughter by a concubine,
has found her a husband, and written
her a deed; then after the father has
gone to his fate she shall not share in
the possessions of the paternal house.
184. If the father has not provided a
dowry for his daughter by a concubine,
and has not found her a husband; then
after the father has gone to his fate her
�26
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
brothers shall provide her a dowry
according to the wealth of the paternal
house, and find her a husband.
185. If a man has taken an infant to
adopt into his own name, and brought
him up; that adopted son may not be
reclaimed.
186. If a man has adopted an infant,
and when he has taken him he injures
his father and his mother; then that
adopted son shall return to his father’s
house.
187. The son of a Nersega, a guard
of the palace, or the son of a devotee
may not be reclaimed.
188. If a son of the people has taken
a child to adoption, and has taught him
his handicraft, he may not be reclaimed.
189. If he has not taught him his
handicraft, that adopted son shall return
to his father’s house.
190. If a man has adopted an infant
as a son, and brought him up, but has
not reckoned him with his children;
then that adopted son shall return to
his father’s house.
191. If a man has adopted an infant
as a son, and brought him up, and has
founded a household, and afterwards
has had children, and if he has set his
face to disown the adopted son; then
that child shall not go his way. His
foster-father shall give him out of his
possessions one-third of the portion of
a son, and then he shall go. Of field,
or garden, or house, he shall not give
him.
192. If the son of a Nersega, or the
son of a devotee, to his foster-father or
his foster-mother, has said, “ Thou art
not my father,” or “ Thou art not my
mother ” ; his tongue shall be cut out.
193. If the son of a Nersega, or the
son of a devotee, has come to know his
father’s house, and he despises his foster
father and his foster-mother, and goes
to the house of his father; his eyes
shall be torn out.
194. If a man has given his child to
a nurse, and the child dies in the hand
of the nurse, and the nurse without the
knowledge of his father and his mother
substitutes another child; she shall be
prosecuted, and because she has sub
stituted another child without the know
ledge of his father and his mother, her
breasts shall be cut off.
195. If a son has struck his father,
his hands shall be cut off.
196. If a man has destroyed the eye
of a free man, his own eye shall be
destroyed.
197. If he has broken the bone of a
free man, his bone shall be broken.
198. If he has destroyed the eye of a
plebeian, or broken a bone of a plebeian,
he shall pay one mina of silver.
199. If he has destroyed the eye of a
man’s slave, or broken a bone of a man’s
slave, he shall pay half his value.
200. If a man has knocked out the
teeth of a man of the same rank, his
own teeth shall be knocked out.
201. If he has knocked out the teeth
of a plebeian, he shall pay one-third of
a mina of silver.
202. If a man strike the body of a
man who is great above him, he shall
receive sixty lashes with a cowhide whip
in the assembly.
203. If a man strike the body of the
son of a free man of like condition, he
shall pay one mina of silver.
204. If a plebeian strike the body of
a plebeian, he shall pay ten shekels of
silver.
205. If a man’s slave strike the body
of the son of a free man, his ear shall
be cut off.
206. If a man has struck another
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
man in a dispute and wounded him,
that man shall swear, “ I did not strike
him knowingly ”; and he shall pay for
the doctor.
207. If he die of his blows, he shall
swear likewise ; and if it be the son of
a free man, he shall pay half a mina of
silver.
208. If he be the son of a plebeian,
he shall pay a third of a mina of silver.
209. If a man strike the daughter
of a free man, and cause her foetus to
fall •, he shall pay ten shekels of silver
for her foetus.
210. If that woman die, his daughter
shall be slain.
211. If he has caused the daughter
of a plebeian to let her foetus fall
through blows, he shall pay five shekels
of silver.
212. If that woman die, he shall pay
half a mina of silver.
213. If he has struck the slave of a
man, and made her foetus fall; he shall
pay two shekels of silver.
214. If that slave die, he shall pay
a third of a mina of silver.
215. If a doctor has treated a man
with a metal knife for a severe wound,
and has cured the man, or has opened
a man’s tumour with a metal knife, and
cured a man’s eye; then he shall receive
ten shekels of silver.
216. If the son of a plebeian, he
shall receive five shekels of silver.
217. If a man’s slave, the owner of
the slave shall give two shekels of silver
to the doctor.
218. If a doctor has treated a man
with a metal knife for a severe wound,
and has caused the man to die, or has
opened a man’s tumour with a metal
knife, and destroyed the man’s eye; his
hands shall be cut off.
219. If a doctor has treated the slave
27
of a plebeian with a metal knife for a
severe wound, and caused him to die ;
he shall render slave for slave.
220. If he has opened his tumour
with a metal knife, and destroyed his
eye, he shall pay half his price in
silver.
221. If a doctor has healed a man’s
broken bone or has restored diseased
flesh, the patient shall give the doctor
five shekels of silver.
222. If he be the son of a plebeian,
he shall give three shekels of silver.
223. If a man’s slave, the owner of
the slave shall give two shekels of silver
to the doctor.
224. If a doctor of oxen or asses has
treated either ox or ass for a severe
wound, and cured it, the owner of the
ox or ass shall give to the doctor onesixth of a shekel of silver for his fee.
225. If he has treated an ox or an
ass for a severe wound, and caused it to
die, he shall give the quarter of its
price to the owner of the ox or the ass.
226. If a brander, unknown to the
owner of a slave, has branded him with
the mark of an inalienable slave, the
hands of that brander shall be cut off-.
227. If a man deceive a brander into
branding with the mark of an inalien
able slave, that man shall be slain and
buried in his own house. The brander
shall swear “ I did not brand him with
knowledge,” and he shall be guiltless.
228. If a builder has built a house for
a man, and completed it, he shall give
him for his pay two shekels of silver for
each sar [of surface] of the house.
229. If a builder has built a house
for a man, and his work is not strong,
and if the house he has built falls in and
kills the householder, that builder shall
be slain.
230. If the child of the householder
�28
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
be killed, the child of that builder shall
be slain.
231. If the slave of the householder
be killed, he shall give slave for slave to
the householder.
232> If goods have been destroyed,
he shall replace all that has been des
troyed ; and because the house that he
built was not made strong, and it has
fallen in, he shall restore the fallen
house out of his own personal property.
233- If a builder has built a house for
a man, and his work is not done pro
perly, and a wall shifts; then that builder
shall make that wall good with his own
silver.
234. If a boat-builder has built a
sixty-ton boat for a man, he shall give
him two shekels of silver for his pay.
235- If a boat-builder has built a boat
for a man and his work is not firm, and
in that same year that boat is disabled
in use ; then the boat-builder shall over
haul that boat, and strengthen it with
his own material, and he shall return
the strengthened boat to the boat
owner.
236. If a man has given his boat on
hire to a boatman, and the boatman is
careless, and the boat is sunk and lost;
then the boatman shall replace the boat
to the boat-owner.
237- If a man has hired boatman and
boat, and laden her with corn, wool, oil,
dates, or any other kind of freight, and
if that boatman is careless and sinks the
boat, and her cargo is lost; then the
boatman shall replace the boat he has
sunk and all her cargo that he has lost.
238. If a boatman has sunk a man’s
boat, and refloated her, he shall give
silver to half her value.
239- If a man hire a boatman, he
shall give him six gur of corn per
annum.
240. If a makhirtu boat has run into
a mukkielbitu boat and sunk her, the
owner of the sunken boat shall pursue
all that was lost in his boat before God.
The makhirtu shall replace to the
mukkielbitu boat that was sunk his
boat and all that was lost in her.
241. If a man distrain an ox, he
shall pay a third of a mina of silver.
242. If a man hires for a year, the
fee for a draught ox is four gur of corn.
243. The fee for a milch-cow is three
gur of corn given to the owner.
244. If a man has hired an ox or an
ass, and a lion has killed it in the open
country, then it is to the owner.
245. If a man has hired an ox, and
by neglect or by blows has caused its
death, he shall replace ox by ox to the
owner of the ox.
246. If a man has hired an ox and
broken its foot or cut the nape of its
neck, he shall replace ox by ox to the
owner of the ox.
247. If a man has hired an ox, and
has knocked out its eye, he shall give
silver to the owner of the ox for half
its value.
248. If a man has hired an ox, and
has broken off its horn, or cut off its
tail, or damaged its muzzle, he shall give
silver for a quarter of its value.
249. If a man has hired an ox, and
God has struck it, and it has died; then
the man who hired the ox shall swear by
the name of God, and shall be guiltless.
250. If a mad bull has rushed upon a
man, and gored him, and killed him;
that case has no remedy.
251. If a man’s ox is known to be
addicted to goring, and he has not
blunted his horns, nor fastened up his
ox; then if his ox has gored a free
man and killed him, he shall give half
a mina of silver.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
252. If it be a man’s slave, he shall
give a third of a mina of silver.
253. If a man has let his field to
another man to dwell upon its face, and
has given him seed corn and entrusted
him with draught oxen, and has con
tracted with him to cultivate the field;
and if that man has stolen seed or
plants, and they are found in his hands,
his hands shall be cut off,
254. If he has received the seed, but
worn out the oxen, he shall replace by
hoed corn.
255. If he has given the man’s
draught oxen on hire, or stolen the
seed-corn and not grown it in the
field, that man shall be prosecuted, and
he shall measure out sixty gur of corn
for every ten gan,
256. If his prefect will not advance
the compensation, he shall be placed
with the cattle in the field.
257. If a man hire a field-labourer,
he shall give him eight gur of corn per
annum,
258. If a man hire a herdsman, he
shall give him six gur of corn per
annum,
259. If a man has stolen a water
wheel from the estate, he shall give five
shekels of silver to the owner of the
wheel.
260. If he has stolen an irrigating
bucket or a harrow, he shall pay three
shekels of silver.
261. If a man hire a pasturer for
cattle and sheep, he shall give him
eight gur of corn per annum.
262. If a man either ox or sheep.......
[defaced].
263. If he has lost ox or sheep that
has been entrusted to him, he shall
replace ox by ox, sheep by sheep, to
the owner.
264. If a herdsman who has had
29
cattle or sheep given him to pasture,
and has been paid his wages as agreed,
and his heart is satisfied; and if the
cattle he has made to diminish, or the
sheep he has made to diminish, and has
made the progeny to decline; then he
shall give progeny and number accord
ing to his agreement.
265. If a herdsman to whom cattle
and sheep have been given to pasture
has lied, and has altered the bargain,
and sold for silver; then he shall be
prosecuted. He shall restore cattle or
sheep to their owner tenfold what he has
stolen.
266. If a stroke of God has occurred
in a fold, or a lion has slain, then the
herdsman shall clear himself before God,
and the owner of the fold shall meet the
disaster to the fold.
267. If the herdsman is in fault, and
has been the occasion of the loss in the
fold; then the herdsman shall restore
the cattle and sheep which he has caused
to be lost in the fold, and shall give
them back to the owner.
268. If a man has hired an ox for
threshing, twenty qa of corn is its hire.
269. If an ass has been hired for
threshing, ten qa of corn is its hire.
270. If a young animal has been
hired for threshing, one qa of corn is
its hire.
271. If a man hire cattle, wagon, and
driver, he shall give 180 qa of corn per
diem.
272. If a man has hired a wagon by
itself, he shall give forty qa of corn per
diem.
273. If a man hire a workman, then
from the beginning of the year until the
fifth month he shall give six grains of
silver per diem. From the sixth month
until the end of the year he shall give
five grains of silver per diem.
�3»
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
274. If a man hire a son of the
people,
(«) Pay of a.......
five grains of silver,
(^) Pay of a potter five grains of silver,
0 Pay of a tailor five grains of silver,
(d) Pay of a mason ... grains of silver,
(e) Pay of a.......
............... of silver,
(/) Pay of a.......
............... of.. silver,
(g) Pay of a carpenter
four grains of silver,
(^) Pay of a rope
maker
four grains of silver,
(?) Pay of a..................grains of silver,
(7) Pay of a builder ... grains of silver,
he shall give per diem.
275« If a man hire a....... , her hire is
three grains of silver per diem.
276. If a man hire a makhirtu, he
shall give two and a-half grains of silver
per diem for her hire.
277. If a man hire a sixty-ton boat,
he shall give a sixth part of a shekel of
silver per diem for her hire.
278. If a man has bought a slave
male or female, and before his month
has expired the bennu sickness has
fallen upon him ; then he shall return
him to the vendor, and the buyer shall
receive back the purchase-money.
279. If a man has bought a slave,
male or female, and there is a claim
then the vendor shall answer the claim.
280. If a man has bought another
man s slave, male or female, in a foreign
land, and when he has come into the
midst of the country the master of the
slave recognises his male or female
slave; then, if they are children of the
land, they shall receive their freedom
without price.
281. If they are children of another
land, the purchaser shall take oath before
God as to the silver he has paid; and
the owner of the slave, male or female,
shall give to the trader silver that he has
paid; and shall recover his male or his
female slave.
282. If a slave shall say to his master,
“Thou art not my master,” he shall be
prosecuted as a slave, and his owner
shall cut off his ear.
The judgments of justice which Ham
murabi, the mighty king, has estab
lished, conferring upon the land a sure
guidance and a gracious rule.
Hammurabi, the protecting king, am
I. I have not withdrawn myself from
the blackheaded race that Bel has en
trusted to me, and over whom Merodach
has made me shepherd. I have not
reposed myself upon my side; but I
have given them places of peace.
Difficult points have I made smooth,
and radiance have I shed abroad.
With the mighty weapon that Zamama
and Ishtar have lent me; with the
penetration with which Ea has en
dowed me; with the valour that Mero
dach has given me, I have rooted out all
enemies above and below; and the
depths have I subjugated. The flesh
of the land I have made rejoice : the
resident people I have made secure; I
have not suffered them to be afraid. It
is I that the great gods have elected to
be the Shepherd of Salvation, whose
sceptre is just.
I throw my good
shadow over my city. Upon my bosom
I cherish the men of the lands of Sumir
and Akkad. By my protecting genius,
their brethren in peace are guided : by
my wisdom are they sheltered. That
the strong may not oppress the weak;
that the orphan and the widow may be
counselled ; in Babylon, the city whose
head has been lifted up by Anu and
Bel; in E Saggil, the temple whose
foundations are as solid as heaven and
earth : to proclaim the law of the land :
to guide the procedure of the land :
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
and to sustain the feeble; I have
written my precious words upon my
pillar, and before my image as King of
Justice I have placed it.
I am the monarch who towers above
the kings of the cities. My words are
well weighed; my valour has no equal.
By command of Shamash, the great
judge of heaven and earth, my justice
shall glisten in the land. By direction
of Merodach, my lord, my monument
shall never see destruction.
In E
Saggil that I love, my name shall ever
be spoken. The oppressed, who has a
lawsuit, shall come before my image as
king of justice. He shall read the
writing on my pillar, he shall perceive
my precious words. The word of my
pillar shall explain to him his cause,
and he shall find his right. His heart
shall be glad [and he shall say] “ The
Lord Hammurabi has risen up as a true
father to his people; the will of Mero
dach, his god, he has made to be
fearedj he has achieved victory for
Merodach above and below. He has
rejoiced the heart of Merodach, his
lord; and gladdened the flesh of his
people for ever. And the land he has
placed in order.” Reading the mandates,
he shall pray before my lord Merodach
and my lady Zarpanit with a full heart;
and the guardian spirits, the deities, who
reside in E Saggil within E Saggil, shall
daily intercede before Merodach my
lord, and Zarpanit my lady.
In after days, and for all time, the
king who is in the land shall observe
the words of justice which are written
upon my pillar. He shall not alter the
law of the land which I have formulated,
or the statutes of the country that I
have enacted: nor shall he damage my
sculptures. If that man has wisdom,
and strives to keep his land in order, he
3i
will heed the words which are written
upofi my pillar. The canon, the rule,
the law of the country which I have
formulated, the statutes of the country
that I have enacted, this pillar shall
show to him. The black-headed people
he shall govern; their laws he shall
pronounce, their statutes he shall decide.
He shall root out of the land the per
verse and the wicked; and the flesh of
his people he shall delight.
Hammurabi, the king of justice, am
I, to whom Shamash has granted recti
tude, My words are well weighed : my
deeds have no equal, above and below
I am the whirlwind that scours the
depth and the height. If that man
heeds my words that I have engraved
upon my pillar, departs not from my
laws, alters not my words, changes not my
sculptures, then may Shamash make the
sceptre of that man to endure as long as
I, the king of justice, and to lead his
people with justice.
But if that man heeds not my words
that I have written upon my pillar; if
he has scorned my malediction, nor
feared the curse of God; if he has
annulled the law that I have given, or
altered my words, or changed my
sculptures, or erased my name in order
to write his own. Or if, from fear of
these curses, he has commissioned
another; then that man, whether he be
king, or lord, or feudatory, or citizen,
whatever his title, may the great Anu,
the father of the gods, who has decreed
my reign, may he extinguish the splen
dour of his royalty, may he shatter his
sceptre, may he curse his end.
May the lord Bel, who fixes fate,
whose word is inalterable, and who has
magnified my royalty ; may he allot him
a rebellion which his hand cannot quell:
the breath of his ruin may he breathe
�32
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
upon his throne: years of sighing:
fewness of days: years of famine:
darkness without light: and a death
with open eyes. May his deep mouth
decree him the overthrow of his city,
the dispersion of his people, the removal
of his royalty, and the annihilation of
his name and memory in the land.
May Beltis, the great mother, whose
word is great in E Kur, the lady who
gives ear to my desires in the place of
justice and statutes before Bel; may she
make his cause bad before Bel; may
she put in the mouth of Bel, the king,
to devastate his land, to annihilate his
people, and to pour out his soul like
water.
May Ea, the great prince, whose
decisions take first place, the divine
thinker, the omniscient, who has length
ened the days of my life ; may he take
understanding and prudence from him ;
may he plunge him in forgetfulness,
obstruct his rivers at their sources, and,
prevent the growth of corn,1 the life of
men, in his land.
May Shamash, the great judge of
heaven and earth, who maintains all
living creatures, the lord who gives con
fidence ; may he cut short his kingship,
misjudge his law, obstruct his path,
arrest the march of his troops, give
him unpropitious visions of the uproot
ing of the foundation of his rule, and
the ruin of his land. May the decree of
Shamash hasten after him; may he lack
life on earth; may he lack water among
the spirits under the earth.
May Sin, the lord of the heavens, my
divine creator, whose crescent shines
among the gods ; may he take from him
diadem and throne of royalty; may he
lay heavy sin upon him, with a penalty
which shall never depart out of his
body; may he complete the days of the
months, the months of the years of his
reign in sighs and tears; may the cares
of government be multiplied to him :
may he destine him a life which is a
struggle with death.
May Adad, the lord of fertility, the
prince of the heavens and the earth, my
helper; may he take away from him the
rains of heaven, and dry up the outflow
of springs; may he waste his territory
with want and famine; may he thunder
his anger against his city ; may he turn
his dominions into ruins by tempests.
May Zamama, the great warrior, the
eldest son of E Kur, who marches at my
right hand upon the field of battle; may
he break his weapons ; may he convert
his day into night, and cause his foe to
triumph over him.
May Ishtar, the mistress of battles
and combats, who wields my weapons,
my guardian angel, who loves my reign ;
may she in her passionate heart, in her
deep anger curse his royalty, turning her
favours into evils; may she shatter his
weapons upon the field of battles and
combats; may she bring tumult and
rebellion upon him ; may she overthrow
his warriors, soaking the earth with their
blood; may she strew the corpses of
his armies in heaps over the plain,
giving them no quarter; may he be
delivered into the hand of his foes, a
prisoner in the enemy’s land.
May Nergal, the mighty among the
gods, whose onslaught none can with
stand, who has granted me victory; with
his mighty force may he burn up his
people like a wisp of rushes; with his
powerful weapons may he lop off his
limbs, and shatter him like an image of
clay.
1 Literally “ Ashnan,” the deity who presided
May Nintu, the sublime lady of tie
over the growth of corn.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
lands, my creative mother; may she
deny him offspring, and leave him no
name, and create no seed of mankind in
the habitations of his people.
May Nin-Karrak, the daughter of
Anu, the herald of my mercy in E Kur;
may she let loose in his members a
violent sickness, a noisome pestilence, a
fearsome wound which cannot be cured,
whose nature no doctor can tell, that
cannot be assuaged by bandage, which
—like the bite of death—cannot be
33
avoided, until she conquer his life;
and over the loss of his vigour he shall
groan.
May the great gods of heaven and
earth, the Anunnaki in their assembly,
the circuit of this temple of E Babbara;
may they all curse him with deadly
curses, his seed, his land, his officers,
his people, and his soldiers.
May Bel, whose word is irrevocable,
may he curse him with a mighty curse,
which shall immediately take effect.
Chapter V.
NOTES ON THE CODE
In order to avoid breaking up the text
of the inscription with notes, all remarks
upon it are relegated to this chapter;
and, as it may be useful to compare the
Babylonian Laws with another Code
that is undoubtedly independent of
them, occasional references are made to
the early Roman legislation called the
Laws of the Twelve Tables. It is true
that the XII. Tabula, were not formu
lated until 450 b.c. ; but, as geographical
and historical considerations render nu
gatory all suggestions of Babylonian
influence, there can be no doubt of
their entire independence. The Rome
of the Decemvirs was in a more bar
barous stage than the Babylon of Ham
murabi ; hence the laws were in many
cases more crude; but we may at least
recognise that very similar problems
confronted the jurists of Italy and of
Babylonia.
First of all, perhaps, attention should
be directed to the bas-relief upon the
top of the pillar. This represents Ham
murabi adoring Shamash, the Sun-god.
We know it is Shamash by the Cultus
tablet of Sippara, dedicated by Nabupaliddina about 870 b.c., which bears
the same figure.1 We know the king is
in the attitude of adoration from the
same sculpture, and from the innumer
able seal-cylinders with similar subjects..
Several commentators have said that
Hammurabi’s pillar represents the king
as receiving his laws from Shamash;
but such statements are in direct conflict
with the inscription, which consistently
claims that the laws were originated by
Hammurabi himself.
The epilogue
commences with the words, Dinat misharim ska Hammurabi sharrum lium
1 Babylonian Religion and Mythology, by
L. W. King (London, 1899), p. 19.
D
�34
NOTES ON THE CODE
ukinnuma—“The judgments of justice
which Hammurabi, the mighty king, has
established” {verso xxiv. 1-5). Later
on it makes Hammurabi speak of the
law of the land which he has formu
lated, and the statutes of the country
that he has enacted (xxv. 64-83), and
it is impossible to make him claim the
authorship of the Code in stronger
slanguage. It is true that he refers
^several times to the god Shamash, “ the
/great judge of heaven and earth,” as the
■ source and the supporter of law and
justice ; but that is quite another thing
• to claiming that the Code was dictated
by the Sun-god.
Shamash is represented upon the basrelief seated upon a throne, with his
feet resting upon the rows of cones
which, in Babylonian art, represent
rocks or mountains; and one of the
names of the Sun-god was II Shadde, or
“god of mountains,” which has been
compared with the Hebrew El Shaddai.
The deity is draped in the usual
flounced dress : from his shoulders rise
wavy lines—intended to symbolise rays
of light; and on his head he wears a
lofty four-horned tiara. In his right
hand he holds an object that looks like
the cheek of a snaffle-bit, but which is
best explained as a ring and a stylus.
The ring symbolises the circle of the
year; the stylus is the implement of the
recording judge; because, as in most
mythologies, the sun is the god of
justice. The consort of Shamash was
Malkat, “ princess ”; and his two sons
were Kettu, “ Law,” and Mesharu,
“Justice.” The Sun-god was a favour
ite subject upon the ancient Baby
lonian seal-cylinders, where he is often
represented as rising up from the
Mountains of the East, while the
attendant genii throw open the doors of
the Dawn before him.1 On a remark
able cylinder illustrated by Dr. Delitzsch2
we have Shamash seated, with all his
attributes, upon a curious boat whose
two ends taper off into human forms;
this boat being the craft which takes the
god across the waters of the under
world during the night in order that he
may rise from the eastern horizon in the
morning.
Underneath the bas-relief the inscrip
tion commences with the words Ninu
Anu £irum, “ When Anu the supreme ”;
and, in accordance with Babylonian
custom, these three words became in
later times the title, or heading, of the
whole code;3 for, as we have already
remarked, the Code of Hammurabi was
the authoritative law-book of Baby
lonia down to the latest period, and it
existed in the cuneiform libraries as a
series of fifteen clay tablets bearing the
above title. The second word is simply
written with the cuneiform sign An,
which stands indifferently for the name
of the god “Anu,” and the word ilu,
“god.” As, however, the sign frequently
figures alone upon the contracts of the
period as the name of Anu, we are
justified in accepting it as bearing this
reading in the inscription. Moreover,
the next phrase contains the special
title of Anu, “ King of the Anunnaki ”
(or spirits of the heavens), so that it is
immaterial whether we render “ When
the supreme God, the king of the
Anunnaki,” or “ When Anu, the
supreme, the king of the Anunnaki ”;
for the phrases would be of identical
mythological import.
The Igigi were the heavenly gods.
1 King, Babylonian Religion, p. 32.
2 Babel and Bible, translated by C. H. W.
Johns, M.A. (London, 1903), p. 74, fig. 49.
3 Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch., vol. xxiv., p. 304.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
35
The black-headed men* were the
**
inhabitants of Babylonia, the phrase
going back to Akkadian times.
In the list of places which follows we
have put the names of the cities in
small capital letters, for more easy
reference. Each city is accompanied
with the title of its chief temple, which
we have put in italic type. The temple
may also be recognised by the prefix E,
an old Akkadian word meaning “ house ”
^Semitic Babylonian bit., the Hebrew
beth\
Thus E Kur is “ the
house of the land”; E Absu 11 the
house of the abyss,” etc.
In Sippara the chief temple was E
Babbar, “ the house of light,” dedicated
to Shamash. His consort Malkat (in
Bkkadian A a) was the Persephone of
the Babylonian pantheon, and it appears
that her grave was shown in the temple
covered with green turf, for she repre
sented Nature in her winter sleep, from
which! she is revived by the summer
sun. Consequently, her symbol in the
great temple of Sippara was the “ ver
dant cenotaph ” restored by the pious
bare of Hammurabi.
The city of Isin had been destroyed
by Rim-Sin, and lay in ruins for thirty
years, until Hammurabi made himself
piaster of southern Babylonia and re
fettled the city with its old inhabitants.
®fergal, the god of the dead, was the
tutelary deity of Kutha, which, accordingly, was the centre of an enormous
pemetery. Therefore, Hammurabi ap
propriately styles himself “ the grave of
the foe ” when he refers to this city and
its temple.
The chief temple of Shirpurla1 was
Benoted by the two characters E and 50.
It is the usual practice of Assyriologists
to transcribe the Babylonian numerals
by the Roman, to which they bear great
analogy. Thus E L would be the
“ house of the Fifty,” or the “house of
the god Fifty ”—i.e., Bel.
Khallabi was the Semitic name of
an important city of Southern Babylonia
called Zariunu in Akkadian. It stood
in the vicinity of Sippara. The British
Museum has a tablet of Rim-Sin record
ing the erection of a temple to the
goddess of this city, and also another
tablet recording that Hammurabi rebuilt
the same temple.1 Evidently the edifice
was commenced by the one and finished
by the other.
It is interesting to note the name of
Nineveh at the end of the list, for this
is the first known mention of the city
that afterwards became so celebrated as
the capital of the realm of Assyria,
which took its name from Assur, the
cradle of the Assyrian power.
Hammurabi’s list of cities is enough
to prove that his was not a world
empire. His kingdom extended from
Nineveh to the Persian Gulf, and em
braced a territory slightly larger than
Italy. Most of the places named are
well known in early Babylonian history,
some of them being at one time the
centres of independent States. The
mention of Nippur, Ur, and Larsam is
noteworthy, for this shows that the in
scription is later than the conquest of
southern Babylonia. That is to say, it
cannot have been set up before Ham
murabi’s thirty-first year.
The king
lived for twelve years after his over
throw of Rim-Sin,■ and the Code must
have been formulated in the interval.
* Girsu was merely the sacred quarter of the
city. See Records of the Past, New Series,
vol. i., p. 47.
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, iii., p. 185.
�36
NOTES ON THE CODE
The Three Estates of Babylonia.
Before considering the individual pre
cepts it will be necessary to say some
thing regarding the three classes of
people presupposed by the Code, We
have, first, the slave; secondly, the free
man; thirdly, the Mushkenu.
The
status of slavery offers no particular
difficulty, and the provisions regarding
it can be easily understood. The status
of free man is less decisive. Most of
the sections begin with the words
shumma amelu, “If a man”; and in
most cases the amelu must be a man of
any degree. But, e.g., § 207, mar ameli
can only mean “son of a free man”;
and § 209, marat ameli, “ daughter of
a free man,” because there are other
penalties for the sons and daughters of
other classes of society. The context
is practically our only guide in deter
mining when amelu means a man in
general, and when it is limited to a free
man, or full citizen.
The real difficulty of the Code lies in
the third class. All through the Code we
have definite regulations regarding Mush
kenu (the Hebrew
adopted into
the Italian as meschino ; and thus into the
French mesquin, “mean” or “shabby”).
The Mushkenu, however, was by no
means a pauper. He possessed silver,
§ 140; and he owned slaves, §§ 15, 175,
219; and his slaves were sometimes
sufficiently well-off to marry free women,
175, 176. A mere artisan, or man
who lives by his labour, is not a Mush
kenu ; he is styled a mar ummia, or
“son of the people,” §§ 188, 274; and
the “ son of the people ” was evidently
a free man, like the other persons who
served for wages and are mentioned in
§§ 239> 257, 258, 261, and 271. A
slave could be emancipated; but there
is nothing in the Code to show how a
Mushkenu could change his condition.
His status depended upon birth, for §§
208, 216, 222 deal with the son of a
Mushkenu, and §211 with a daughter of
the same. The Mushkenu’s life and
limb were valued at less than those of a
free man, and more than those of a
slave, §§ 198, 201, 204. Consequently,
he stood midway between the class of
full freeman and the class of full slave,
and the term “plebeian” would seem
best to express his condition. When
§ 15 wishes to express the idea of “ the
slave of a man of high degree, or the
slave of a man of low degree,” it uses
the terms, “ slave of the palace or slave
of a plebeian”; therefore, the plebeian
was the humblest individual who could
be thought of as possessing slaves.
Semitic Idioms.
The translation of the Code has been
made as literally as possible consistent
with intelligibility ; hence idiomatic
expressions are left as in the original.
These need not offer any difficulty, for
some are familiar from the Old Testa
ment, and the others are easily com
prehensible. The following are a few
examples:—
§ 137. “Set his face” — has a design
to.
§169. “Turn aside his face” =
change his intention.
§ 162. “ Gone to her fate ” = has died.
Shimtu means “fate,” or “destiny,” or
“lot”; and, as death is the common lot
of humanity, the Babylonian idiom ex
pressed it as going to one’s destiny.
§ 137. “The husband of her heart”—
i.e., of her own choice.
§ 194. “In the hand of” — in the
possession of; etc.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
Of Sorcery.
The Babylonians distinguished two
kinds of witchcraft—viz., nertu and
kispu, which we have here translated
by “ curse ” and “ spell.” A man who
considered himself bewitched would
resort to the village Asu. The Asu
(translated in this Code by “doctor”)
combined in himself the offices of
exorcist, medicine man, physician and
surgeon. His method of procedure
was usually to pronounce a counter
spell upon the suspected wizard. Such
a suspicion, however, might be without
foundation, and a perfectly innocent
man might find himself in the un
pleasant predicament of being de
nounced before his neighbours as a
wizard, and himself the subject of the
village magician’s exorcism, carrying
with it unknown perils to the super
stitious mind.
The Code, therefore,
gives the suspected party the right of
challenging the exorcism ; and we know
from African examples that a native will
face any ordeal to clear himself from the
suspicion of witchcraft. The Code does
not inform us how nertu was to be
justified—perhaps that could be made
the subject of judicial inquiry ; but the
sufferer from kispu could claim the
ordeal by water, and the “River-God”1
decided the case. Not only did the
Babylonians consider sorcery an actual
thing capable of being dealt with
legally, but the Romans, who are usually
considered a practical, hard-headed
people, were fully convinced of the
reality of magic, and the XII. Tables (viii.
8) forbid a man to remove his neigh
bour’s crops from one field to another by
incantation, or to conjure away his corn.
1 In the inscription the word for “river” has
the sign for divinity prefixed to it.
37
§ 4. Silver and corn formed the cus
tomary currencies of Babylonia. The
silver was in the form of bullion, for
coined money was not introduced until
the reign of the Persian king Darius
Hystaspes. The table of weight was as
follows :—
180 grains
= 1 shekel
60 shekels = 1 mina
60 minse
= 1 talent
(The Babyloniangrain was somewhat
heavier than the English.)
The corn measure ran :—
60 gin — 1 qa
300 qa = 1 gur
No certain English equivalents of
these weights and measures can be
given. See notes on § 42 and § 234.
§ 5. The XII. Tabb, (ix.) directed
the execution of any judge convicted of
taking a bribe. The Babylonian goes
further, and degrades the judge who
gives an unjust verdict, though there is
no question of bribery.
§ 6 only speaks of the goods of god
or palace; but it appears from the
context of §§ 7, 9, 10 that the theft of
private property was visited with the
same penalty. The “goods of a god ”
are, of course, the temple property.
Throughout the Code we find the word
ilu, “ god,” used indefinitely, as “ a
god.” Such a practice no more implies
that the Babylonians were monotheists
than such names as Theodorus or Theo
philus prove the ancient Greeks to have
been monotheists. The “palace” is
Ekal in the original, and the Ekal is not
necessarily the residence of the king.
In one of Hammurabi’s letters, for
example,1 a revenue official speaks of
the “palace” as the recipient of the
local taxes. Consequently, the Ekal
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, iii., p. 49.
�38
NOTES ON THE CODE
must be the residence of the governor
of the locality. In § 176 “slave of the
palace ” is first mentioned, and then
“ the owner of the slave,” so that it is
not an edifice, but a person, that the
legislator has in view.
§ 8. A boat is reckoned as a living
thing, and is mentioned together with
animals. The Roman Law of theft in
the XII. Tabb. (viii. 16) limited the
penalty to double the value of the pro
perty stolen; but if the thief were taken
in the act, and found to be a free man,
he was scourged and sold into slavery;
if already a slave, he was hurled from
theTarpeian rock.
§ 9 shows the importance attached to
written documents.
§ 21. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 12, 13)
prescribe that a thief may lawfully be killed
if taken in the act at night; but not by
day, unless he be armed and resists
capture.
§ 24. The locality had to pay blood
money to the relatives of a murdered
man if the murderer could not be found.
This clause and § 153 are the only
places where murder is mentioned in the
Code.
§ 25. The XII. Tables (viii. 10)
directed that if a man set fire to a
house, or a stack of corn near a house,
the incendiary was to be bound, scourged,
and burned alive.
Of Military Service.
the king,” as Dr. Winckler1 remarks,
reminds us of the Arabic “Way of
Allah,” meaning a campaign. In Islam,
Allah has taken the place of the king as
director of the war. A defeat of the
Babylonian army is euphemistically
styled “ a misfortune of the king.”
§ 32 shows that the temple played a
part in the village organisation similar
to that of a medieval parish church.
The soldier who could not pay his own
ransom could claim it from his local
temple. But if from poverty, or invasion,
or the number of similar claims, the
temple was unable to provide the money,
then only did “ the palace ” intervene as
a last resort.
§ 42. Three gur of corn was reckoned
an average yield for a gan of land; and
the yearly rent of a gan was usually one
gur of corn. Our knowledge of Baby
lonian metrology, however, is not suffi
cient to enable exact equivalents of these
measures to be given;2 but the propor
tions stated will enable one to gauge
roughly the onerousness of the various
penalties set down in the Code.
§ 45. The Babylonians looked upon
most of the operations of nature as due
to the direct interference of the gods;
thus §§ 45, 48, speak of the god Adad
as flooding the fields. Adad was the
deity of storms and thunder; hence in
this place his name is to be read as the
equivalent of “thunderstorm.” There
is a similar expression, “ stroke of God,”
in § 266.
§ 48. The dipping of the tablet in
water was a symbolical act.
§§ 57, 58. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 6, 7)
The Babylonian kings (and also the
Assyrians) provided themselves with
soldiers by a kind of feudal system.
Portions of the royal domains were
allotted to individuals, who were bound
to serve in the army when called upon.
1 Die Geseize Hammurabis, von Dr. H.
A vassal summoned on “ the way of the Winckler (Leipsic, 1903), p. 13, n. 1.
2 Assyrian Deeds and Documents, by Rev.
king ” was executed as a deserter if he
C. H. W. Johns (Cambridge, 1901), vol. ii.,
did not appear. The phrase “way of cap. iii.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
prescribe that a quadruped that has
(femaged a neighbour’s land shall be
given to the aggrieved party, unless the
owner make compensation. And he
that pastures his animals on a neigh
bour’s land is liable to an action.
f 59. XIE Tabb. (viii. 11). “If a
man wrongly fell his neighbour’s trees,
he shall pay a penalty of twenty-five
ases of bronze in respect of each tree.”
The Erasure
upon the
Pillar.
After § 65 comes the erasure already
mentioned. In the Kouyunjik collec
tion of the British Museum, however,
there is a tablet, No. R.M. 277, which
contains in its first column of writing a
complete copy of § 58 of the Hammu
rabi Code, preceded by a fragment of
§ 57, and followed by the commencement
of § 59. In the second column of this
tablet is another law which we have
transcribed as § a. The reverse of this
same tablet, although very much muti
late^ exhibits detached fragments of
Hammurabi’s Sections 107, 113, 114,
115, 119, and 120. There can thus be
nt® doubt that the intermediate para
graph (a) belonged to the now obliterated
portion of the Code.
Another British Museum tablet, No.
D.T. 81, bears on its face the law we
have transcribed as § b, and on its reverse
| c, together with fragments of Sections
gogj 104, iii, and 112. So that here
again it is clear that we have another
Copy of the Code which has preserved to
ut obliterated parts of the pillar. If
these two tablets were in good condition,
they would have given us the whole of
the missing ordinances; but, unfortu
nately, they are both badly mutilated.
§ loo. When the column again be
comes legible, it is found to be dealing
39
with trading affairs. The Babylonian
principal {Tamkar, “trader”) stayed at
home and looked after his warehouses
and accounts. Agents, or pedlars, were
entrusted with the duty of travelling
about the country and making sales or
purchases. The agent (Shamallu) we
translate as “ retailer.”
§ 108. The Babylonian wine was pre
pared from dates, as the grape-vine is
not indigenous to the country. The
term “ wine-seller ” is preceded by the
determinative for “ woman,” so that the
wine-seller was evidently a female. The
Assyrians and Babylonians had two
systems of metronomy—viz., by the
“heavy mina” and the “light mina,”
the one being twice the weight of the
other; but there is nothing to show that
the abnu rabitu, or “ grand weight,” of
the Code had anything to do with this.
The abnu cikhritu, or “little weight,”
was a third of a shekel. Mr. C. H. W.
Johns has suggested that, as the “ little
weight ” was sixty grains, the “ grand
weight” may have been 120 grains.
§ 109. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 26}
forbade seditious nocturnal assemblies.
§110. See the section “Of Priest
esses.”
§ 115. The XII. Tables (iii.) direct
that, if a debtor cannot meet his liabili
ties, the creditor may arrest him and
bind him with thongs, or put upon him
fetters not exceeding i51bs. weight,
The debtor may live on his own means,
or, if he is unable to do so, the creditor
may allow him at least one pound of
bread per diem. If the claim were not
settled within sixty days, the debtor
might be put to death or sold beyond
the Tiber, after being paraded in the
comitium on three market-days and the
amount of debt proclaimed. “After the
third market-day the creditors may cut
�40
NOTES ON THE CODE
their several portions of his body, and to have been accidentally omitted from
anyone that cuts more or less than his the inscription.
just share shall be held guiltless.”
§ 158. This refers to incest with a
father’s wife who is not the mother of
Of Marriage.
the offender.
Babylonian marriage was by contract
§ 165. A father’s property was divided
(§ 128). Many of the contract tablets equally among his sons. He had no
deal with this subject, and the virginity testamentary power, though he could
of the bride is frequently guaranteed. disinherit an undutiful son (§§ 168, 169),
Consequently, the stories of Herodotus but only under judicial direction.
about the Babylonian women may be Daughters were provided for by their
dismissed as idle and absurd inventions, dowries. Deeds of gift made during a
like his other fables about Babylon / man’s lifetime were valid against any
and the Code shows the importance claim made by an heir. The Code
attached to female reputation in Baby makes no provision in cases where there
lonia.
The Babylonian woman was are no sons ; but it may be taken that
given in marriage by her father or in such a situation the wife would
brothers (§ 184).
The suitor or his inherit (§§ 172, 176).
family paid a certain sum as “ bride
§§ 171, 172. These paragraphs appear
price,” the amount being often handed to have been incompletely divided by
over in instalments (Sections 159-61). Father Scheil; but it would lead to
The bride’s father gave her a “ dowry ” confusion to alter the numeration.
{Sheriqtu), which usually, but not neces
§§176. By a printer’s error in Father
sarily, included the “bride-price” (fTirk- Scheil’s work, two succeeding paragraphs
hatu).
The bridegroom might also have the same number prefixed to them.
make
his bride a “ settlement ”
§ 177. The word in brackets appears
\Nudunmi).
to have been accidentally omitted from
The status of the “ concubine ” is not the inscription.
•clear. She does not seem to be neces
Of Priestesses.
sarily of lower rank, like the Roman, but
was a secondary spouse (§ 145). Like
§§ 178-82 relate to women under
the chief wife, she carried bride-price religious vows. Four of the words used
and dowry, and we may assume that she are preceded by the determinative for a
possessed the same rights as the chief married woman. They are :—
wife in regard to maintenance and par
Nin-an = Priestess
ticipation in the husband’s estate.
Kallati = An undowered priestess
Qadishtu = An inferior priestess
§ 144. The cuneiform sign here trans
Wife of Merodach = An inferior
lated “ wife ” is the one used throughout
priestess.
the Code to denote a married woman.
The precept, therefore, applies to any Two of the titles have merely the prefix
married woman.
for “ woman,” and they were therefore
§ 150. The words in brackets appear unmarried. They were the Zikru and
1 The Laws of Moses, by Stanley A. Cook, the “ virgin.”
M.A. (London, 1903), p. 101.
|
The priestesses of Carthage were
�NOTES ON THE CODE
always married; and on the Cartha
ginian tombstones the husband of the
priestess is invariably mentioned byname.
It is therefore to be expected that the
Babylonian priestesses were also married.
§ 181 mentions virgins, but they were
evidently of low rank in the hierarchy.
The principal priestess is denoted by the
signs Nin-an, “Divine Lady.” She was
expected to lead a blameless life. She
might not open a tavern, or even enter
one (§ no); and slander against a Ninan was severely punished (§ 127).
The priestess (Nin-an) received a
dowry from her father (§§178, 179).
Where no dowry was given (§ 180) the
Nin-an is replaced by the Kallati; so
that the Kallati is a dowerless priestess.
A Qadishtu is in the same predicament;
but, being of lower rank, she only takes
the usufruct of a third of a son’s share,
whereas a Kallati has the usufruct of a
complete son’s share. The “ Wife of
Merodach ” ranked with a Qadishtu,
except that she had the power to bequeath
her share of her father’s estate.
The virgin ranks with a Qadishtu.
The unmarried Zikru “ devotee ” may
receive a dowry upon entering a religious
life (§§ 178, 179), or she may not (§ 180).
Her children were not acknowledged
(§§ *7, 192, 193). Zakaru is a root
8
found in Syriac, Hebrew, and Arabic, as
well as in Assyrian, with the meaning of
“male,” “name,” or “memorial.” Father
Scheil takes it with its determinative
prefix, reads zinnishat zikru, and renders
“ female of the male,” though in such
case it should be zinnishat zikri. Dr.
Winckler makes it “courtesan.” The
Rev. Mr. Johns, of Cambridge, reads
zinnishtu zikru (which is more in accor
dance with the text), and renders it
“vowed woman.” This is practically
the same as our rendering “ devotee.”
41
§ 187. Ner-se-ga is an unknown class.
From § 193 it appears to have been a
man ; from § 187 he was attached
to the governor’s palace. His children
were not acknowledged, nor allowed
to recognise their parentage (§§ 192,
!93)§ 188. A “son of the people,” mar
ummia, was an artisan (see § 274).
§§ 196, 197, 200. This is the Lex
talionis. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 2) “ If a
man breaks another’s limb, and does
not compromise the injury, he shall be
liable to retaliation.” (viii. 3) “ For
breaking a bone of a free man the penalty
shall be 300 ases of bronze; of a slave,
150 ases.”
§202. The word translated “body”
may mean a part of the viscera, or, as
Father Scheil renders it, “ brain.” The
Section maybe compared with XII. Tabb,
(viii. 4), which prescribe a penalty of
twenty-five ases of bronze for a personal
injury or affront.
§215. The word nagabti, translated
“ tumour,” is of uncertain significance,
though, as the root has the meaning of
“hollow,” it is most likely to be con
nected with an abscess, ulcer, or tumour.
Father Scheil suggests that, as the word
is several times used in connection with
the eye, it may refer to the operation
for cataract; but a successful operation
for cataract does not always completely
restore the sight of the eye, owing to the
necessary removal of part of the cornea,
and the Babylonians had no lenses to
correct such a defect. The patient
might consider his eye destroyed because
he was unable to see as well as before, and
the surgeon would thus be blamed for
a perfectly successful operation.
It
would, therefore, seem better to under
stand nagabti as a tumour. Where the
tumour involved the eye the surgeon
�42
NOTES ON THE CODE
could claim his fee on the higher scale
for a successful operation.
§ 226. The gallabu. combined the
professions of barber and brander. His
services were sometimes required in
courts of law (§ 127).
§ 234. The tonnage of Babylonian
boats was expressed in gur, the gur
being about a ton and a fifth. Boats
were built from five gur upwards, and in
one of his letters Hammurabi speaks of
a ship of seventy-five gur, which must
have been nearly equal in size to a
modern vessel of 100 tons burthen. The
boat in the text is of sixty gur, and we
have translated “sixty-ton boat” for
brevity.
§ 236. The word uttebi evidently
means “ sunk,” not merely “run aground”
(see § 238).
§ 240. It being quite uncertain what
these terms signify, they are left un
translated. By § 276 a makhirtu was
a small vessel, for it could be hired for
grains of silver; whereas a sixty-ton
boat earned thirty grains of silver a day.
§ 241. Oxen were exempted from
distraint as being absolutely necessary
for agriculture ; therefore, the same
penalty is inflicted as in the case of
illegal distraint (§ 114).
§ 249. Mundane events being under
the control of the gods, anything inex
plicable was put down to the stroke of a
god (compare §§ 45, 48).
§ 2 54. If the metayer has ill-used the
oxen so that they cannot do the work,
he must execute the field labour with
the marru, a kind of hoe still in use in
Mesopotamia under the same name.
This would entail great manual exertion
on his part.
§ 256 shows that a man’s superior was
usually expected to assist him in fines
and liabilities. In fact, the penalties
laid down in the Code could be met in
no other way, for they would be quite
beyond the means of labourers and small
farmers. Mr. Stanley A. Cook shows
from actual contract-tablets that when a
man hired himself out he had to find a
guarantor.1 Dr. Winckler supposes the
law to indicate a man’s “village com
munity”; but it does not appear that
such communities existed in Babylonia
—in fact, the whole tenour of the Code
is opposed to such a theory, for it only
contemplates that the landholder will
make bargains with individual tenants
and workpeople.
§§ 259, 260. The objects mentioned
in these two paragraphs refer to irrigating
machines, not mill wheels.
§ 273. The Babylonian year began in
Nisan, or April, and the fifth month was
Ab, or August. Consequently, the first
five months were the period of the
hardest agricultural work, and the work
man (literally “ man of hire ”) received
increased pay.
§ 274. Just at this point there is a
fissure in the stone where the pillar was
broken across, and the columns of cunei
form characters are badly mutilated.
280. “Children of the land ” would
mean natives of Babylonia. As a Baby
lonian could only be held in bondage
three years (§ 117), he was emancipated
under the circumstances stated in the
text.
§ 282. The loss of an ear was the
usual punishment of a refractory slave
(see § 205).
In his final peroration Hammurabi
says, “ I have not reposed myself upon
my side ”—i.e., he had not given himself
up to sloth, but had been active for the
1 Laws of Moses, p. 174.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
good of his people. Then, as is usual
in monuments of antiquity, the king
threatens with the most frightful curses
anyone who alters or damages the pillar.
Of Homicide.
/
It is worthy of note that the Code
makes no provision for wilful homicide
except in §§ 24 and 153. It would
therefore appear that this crime was
treated as extra-judicial. In § 153 it is
enacted that a woman guilty of murder
ing her husband shall be impaled ; but
this may merely mean that her body
was to be impaled, and gives us no
information as to the method or rule of
execution. In § 24 the relatives of a
man murdered by bandits receive one
mina of silver (twice the price of
accidental homicide, § 207). This would
seem to show that the institution of
blood-money was recognised in Baby
lonia. On the other hand, manslaughter
rendered a man subject to the lex talionis
(§§ 229, 210, 230), and this certainly
indicates that among the Babylonians,
as among other ancient peoples, homicide
was dealt with by the vendetta. In the
Old Testament it was one of the duties
of the go el, the next-of-kin, to avenge
43
murder; and the Pentateuch is quite un
compromising upon the subject. Exodus
xxi. 12, 14, denies all sanctuary to the
murderer. Deut. xix. 12 shows that the
Hebrew judicial authorities had nothing
to do with homicide except to hand over
the criminal to the vengeance of the
goelha-dam. And Num. xxxv. 19, 21, 31,
reiterates the command that the “avenger
of blood” shall slay the murderer when
ever and wherever he may meet him,
and that no compensation is to be
accepted. In the same way, therefore,
it is pretty certain that in Babylonia wilful
homicide was a family matter, with which
the judicature was not allowed to interfere.
If it had been customary to compound
for the crime, we may be sure that the
legislator would have made some attempt
to regulate the blood-price, as is done
in the other cases. The silence of the
Code, therefore, is significant. The El
Amarna letters demonstrate the existence
of the blood-feud in Babylonia, for
Burna-Buriash writes to Amenophis IV.
that, if the blood of his messengers who
have been slain in Canaan is not requited,
then Egyptian messengers may be slain
in retaliation.1
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. iii, p. 66.
Chapter VI.
THE LAWS OF MOSES
The Sacred Books of the Jews are Palestine ; for the inscription of Mesha,
written in the language called “ Hebrew.” king of Moab (about 850 b.c.), is a
' This language was not confined to the specimen of Hebrew, as are also the
Jewish community, but was the common lapidary memorials of the Phoenicians, who
tongue of all the ancient inhabitants of dwelt on the coast of the Mediterranean.
�44
THE LA WS OF MOSES
The earliest independent references to
the land of Palestine are to be found
upon the monuments of the Egyptian
kings Thothmes III. and Rameses II.1
These monuments contain lists of names
of Syrian localities; and, as far as
Palestine is concerned, these names
agree in character with the later nomen
clature of the country—that is to say,
they are to be explained by the Hebrew
language. The Hebrew-speaking peoples,
therefore, must have been settled in
Palestine for a very long period to have
so completely coloured the topography
in this way; in fact, we are justified in
saying that Hebrew had been spoken in
the country from time immemorial.
In the year 1887 a discovery was made
at Tell-el-Amarna, in Egypt, of a large
number of clay tablets, inscribed with
cuneiform characters.
These tablets
proved to be communications addressed
to the Egyptian kings Amenophis III.
and Amenophis IV. The correspondents
of these monarchs comprised Assuruballit, king of Assyria, Burna-Buriash,
king of Babylonia, and a number of
Syrian notables. It need hardly be said
that the language employed on the
letters of the kings of Assyria and Baby
lonia was the one known as SemiticBabylonian. But there were a number
of the tablets addressed from places in
Palestine ; and these Palestinian tablets
were in Semitic-Babylonian also ! We
have just seen that the indigenous
language of Palestine was Hebrew. How
comes it, therefore, that these Palestinian
letters were written in a foreign tongue ?
The only reply can be that Hebrew was
at that time an illiterate language. If
there had been any means of writing
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. v.,
p. 54 ; vol vi., p. 19.
Hebrew, we may be sure that the princes
of Palestine would never have gone to
the trouble of getting their messages
translated into Babylonian, and written
down in the intricate and difficult cunei
form script.
In other cases where
previously illiterate nations came into
contact with the cuneiform method of
writing, and adopted it, they did not
employ the foreign language very long,
but very quickly adapted the cuneiform
syllabary to their own tongue. A notable
instance of this is met with in the Proto
Armenian inscriptions of Van.1 In the
Tell-el-Amarna correspondence the king
of Mitanni (a district in Mesopotamia
near Carchemish) occasionally employed
his own language as well as Semitic;
and the Persians at a later period not
only appropriated the Babylonian style of
writing, but developed a new system of
cuneiform of their own. The inference
is, therefore, that the Hebrew princes
had not been familiar with cuneiform
very long, or they would have applied it
to their own language in similar fashion
to other nations. The oldest known
specimens of written Hebrew are the
Baal Lebanon Bronzes.2 These are in
alphabetic writing. It is obvious that
1 “ Since the publication of my Memoir on
‘The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van Deciphered
and Translated ’ in the Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society, xiv. 4, 1882, we have begun to
learn something about a race of kings who ruled
on the shores of Lake Van in Armenia, from the
ninth to the seventh centuries before our era.
The founder of the dynasty, Sarduris I., the soft
of Lutipris, who reigned B.c. 833, introduced
the cuneiform system of writing as well as other
elements of Assyrian culture into the country
over which he was king. The inscriptions he
has left us are in the Assyrian language ; but
his successors discontinued the use of a foreign
tongue, and the language of their texts is
invariably their native one.”—Prof. A. H.
Sayce, in Records of the Past, New Series,
vol. i., p. 163.
1 The History of the Alphahet, by Isaac
Taylor, vol i., p. 213.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
no people that once employed the
alphabetic character would ever abandon
it for the cumbrous cuneiform; and
therefore the alphabet cannot have been
known in the Tell-el-Amarna period.
And when once it was introduced we
may be sure that there was no further
possibility of cuneiform being applied
for the writing of Hebrew.
There is one thing, however, which
the tablets of Tell-el-Amarna make quite
clear, and that is that at the time they
were written there were no such people
as the Israelites in Palestine ; for the
data they furnish cannot be squared
with the statements of the books of
Joshua and Judges. It has been pointed
out in Chapter III., p. io, that, according
to the testimony of Nabonidus, BurnaBuriash reigned over Babylon 700 years
after Hammurabi; and as Burna-Buriash
was the author of some of the Tell-elAmarna letters it follows, therefore, that
Hammurabi must have lived at least 700
years before the appearance of the Jews
in Canaan.
It is hardly necessary nowadays to
insist upon the fact that the well-known
narratives of Genesis, such as the two
accounts of the Creation and the stories
of the Flood, are merely excerpts from
Babylonian cosmogony and Babylonian
mythology. The discovery of the great
Code raises the very natural question as
to whether the legislation of the Penta
teuch is not also of Babylonian origin.
It is true that the Jews attributed their
legislation to Moses; but Moses (if he
ever had any real existence) must have
lived seven centuries later than the
Babylonian lawgiver. Even in the life
legend of the Hebrew legislator we are
confronted with Babylonian elements,
for the story told of the infancy of Moses
is also related of the famous Babylonian
45
monarch Shargani-shar-ali, or Sargon of
Agade, who flourished about 3800 b.c.,
and who is said to have been exposed in
an ark of bulrushes upon the River
Euphrates, whence he was rescued, and
grew up to be ruler of all Babylonia.
Modern scholarship ha« dissected the
Hebrew Pentateuch into several super
posed layers, ranging in date from about
the eighth century b.c. to the time of
Alexander the Great. The details of
this dissection have been stated with
great caution and moderation by Dr. S. R.
Driver,1 and need not be repeated here;
but they establish the existence in the
so-called Books of Moses of at least four
systems of legislation, in the following
order :—
The Book of the Covenant — Exod.
xx.-xxiii. 33 (to which is related Exod.
xxxiv. 11-26).
The Book of Deuteronomy.
The Law of Holiness =■ Levit. xvii.—
xxvi.
The Priests'1 Code = The balance of
the “ Mosaic ” legislation.
The Priests' Code is the latest and
most important constituent of the Penta
teuch. It cannot be earlier than the
time of Ezra, while it received additions
at even later dates.
The Law of Holiness is a distinct
Code in itself, resembling the other two.
previous codes by opening with sacri
ficial instructions, and closing with a
parenetic exhortation.2
The closest
affinities of this stratum of the Penta
teuch are with the prophet Ezekiel, to
whose time it probably belongs.
Deuteronomy is evidently the “ Book
of the Law ” which Hilkiah, the Highpriest of Jerusalem, professed to have
1 An Introduction to the Literature of theOld Testament, fifth edition (Edinburgh, 1894)..
2 Driver, p. 44.
�46
THE LA WS OF MOSES
found in the Temple in the eighteenth
year of Josiah ( ., 621 b.c.).
>
*
This leaves us with the Book of the
Covenant as the earliest extant example
of Hebrew legislation. Professor W.
Robertson Smith1 styled Exod. xx.xxiii. “the First Legislation”; later
critics have preferred the term Bundesbuch, or “ Book of the Covenant.” This
“ book ” appeared so important to the
author of Exodus that he represented it
as having been dictated to Moses by
Yahveh himself from the mount of
Sinai, to the accompaniment of smoke,
fire, trumpets, thunders and lightnings,
and every circumstance that could con
tribute to the awful and solemn char
acter of the revelation. This reverence
for the “ book,” however, was not shared
by other Israelites, for the author of
Deuteronomy had no scruple whatever
in endeavouring to supersede it by a
rival code, and Professor W. R. Smith
gave a table to show “how completely
Deuteronomy covers the same ground
as the First Legislation.”13 Even in
2
Exodus itself we see that the scribes
had no hesitation in tampering with the
text, for it is obvious that xx. 18 follows
immediately after xix. 25, the inter
mediate “ Ten Words ” being an inter
polation.
Furthermore, if the Ten
Words had formed part of the original
text of Exodus, there would have been
no necessity for xx. 23, which simply
repeats xx. 4. In the same way xxiii.
12 would be redundant in face of xx. 9,
10. There have been interminable dis
cussions upon the date and origin of
the Ten Commandments, which are now
1 The Old Testament in the Jewish Church
(Edinburgh, 1881), p. 316.
3 O. T. J. C., p. 432. See also Hastings’
Dictionary of the Bible, article “ Deutero
nomy.”
inserted in the twentieth chapter of
Exodus. As, however, the phrase “the
stranger within thy gates ” (xx. 10) is
distinctly Deuteronomic, we must take
it that these commandments are later
than Deuteronomy. As, furthermore,
xx. 11 refers to the six days of creation,
the passage must be later than the first
chapter of Genesis,1 which is part of the
Priests’ Code, and therefore compara
tively modern. The Ten Command
ments must therefore be eliminated, and
the speech of Yahveh commences at
Exod. xx. 22, and extends to xxiii. 33.
It consists essentially of a code of laws,
mingled with exhortations.
The question now arises as to the
originality of this Sinaitic legislation.
In view of the Hammurabi Code, it was
clearly unnecessary for Moses to seek
for any supernatural guidance in framing
a body of laws, seeing that such an
excellent system had been worked out
700 years before, and the Israelites were
on the eve of entering a land where the
Babylonian legislation was in all prob
ability well known. Assuming, however,
1 “The six days of creation” is not a Baby
lonian idea, nor is it found upon the “ Creation
Tablets” which describe the overthrow of
Tiamat by Merodach and the subsequent
formation of the universe. As Delitzsch and
Martineau have pointed out, an attentive
perusal of the first chapter of Genesis reveals
the fact that the days of creation were no part
of the original Hebrew narrative. The Elohist
account originally made the creation to take
place by eight stages—viz., Gen. i. 3, 6, 9, 11,
14, 20, 24, 26. Each of these sections origi
nally began with the words “and God said,”
and ended with “and God saw that it was
good”; but the latter phrase has dropped out
of the second section, probably by a clerical error,
though the Talmud assures us that the words
were intentionally omitted because hell . was
created on that day. Consequently, the division
of the creation among the six days of the week
musthavebeentheworkof some late Sabbatarian,
who thought by that means to give a greater
authority to the old Babylonian institution of
the Sabatiu, or sabbath.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
that modern criticism is right, and
that the laws in Bxodus are no earlier
than the prophets Hosea, Amos, and
Micah (f <?., the eighth century b.c.), we
are so much the further removed from
the time of Hammurabi, and so much
the closer to the fresh wave of Baby
lonian influence which was rapidly
spreading westward owing to the Assyrian
conquests, It may be remarked that
the arrangement of the Book of the
Covenant bears a superficial resem
blance to that of the Code of Ham
murabi. The “ Book ” begins with
directions as to how Yahveh is to be
worshipped; then follow the laws ; and
finally there is an exhortation to observe
these laws. The Code opens with a
declaration of the greatness of Hammurabi; then come the laws; and
lastly there is an appeal to posterity to
respect his monument and legislation.
In any case, however, if there be any
relationship between the Hebrew and
the Babylonian legislations, there is only
oae possible conclusion, and that is that
the Hebrew was borrowed from the
earlier Babylonian.
Th® Three Estates
of
Israel.
We have already seen that the Baby
lonian Code deals with three classes of
persons—the free man, the slave, and
the Mushkenu.
In like manner the
Hebrew legislation is concerned with
three classes—viz., the free man, the slave,
and the Ger (translated “stranger” in the
English version). The Ger (= “client” or
“sojourner”) was a person intermediate
between a slave and a full citizen. The
pious Israelite sometimes described him
self as a Ger of Yahveh (Ps. xxxix. 12),
and on the Phoenician monuments we
have such .names as Ger-Melek, GerAstarte, Ger-Melqarth, etc. But while
47
the Mushkenu has clearly defined rights
in Babylonian Law, the Book Of the
Covenant merely recommends that the
Ger shall not be wronged or oppressed
(Exod. xxii. 21, xxiii. 9). There is a vast
difference between giving a man a legal
standing and simply recommending him
to mercy. In Deuteronomy the Ger is
still the object of a semi-contemptuous
pity; and while the Book of the Cove
nant (Exod. xxii. 31) directs that flesh
torn by wild animals is to be given to
dogs to eat, the more frugal Deuteronomist allows unclean food to be given to
the Ger. The Priests’ Code, however,
shows the Ger on the high road to
amalgamation or emancipation, for it
directs that there shall be one law for
the Ger and for the freeborn Israelite
(Lev. xxiv. 22 ; Num. xv. 15).
The Jewish Tribunal.
The Code of Hammurabi may be con
sidered to have definitely settled the
true meaning of Exod. xxi. 6, xxii. 8, p.
The Code regularly directs that a case
shall be taken makhar ili—i.e., “ before
God” (or ‘ before a god,” for the Baby
lonians were not so poverty-stricken that
they only had one God). The Book of
the Covenant .n one place directs that a
slave shall be brought “ unto God,” and
in the other passages that litigants shall
come near unto “ God.” Commentators
and translators with a dread of anthropo
morphism have been puzzled over
these passages, and have suggested that
the word Elohim here means “judges,”
as we may see by the margin of the
Revised Version. But, in view of the
Babylonian Code, there can be no doubt
whatever that what is meant is the local
altar of the deity; and in 1 Sam. ii. 25
we read of Elohim judging between man
and man, so that the author of this part
�48
THE LA WS OF MOSES
of Samuel at any rate was familiar with
the idea of bringing cases “before God.”
The best way to determine the relation
ship of the Book of the Covenant is to
compare it verse by verse with the Code
of Hammurabi; and, as Exod. xx. 2226 is merely of a ritual character, we
must commence our comparison with the
twenty-first chapter.
Exod.
§H7- The principle of the
xxx.2-11 Babylonian and Hebrew enact
ments is the same. In both cases
the free native cannot be held in
perpetual slavery. But while the
Babylonian law limited the period
of bondage to three years, the
Hebrew extended it to six; and
even this was eventually found to
be too short a time to enable the
average debtor to repay his debt.
Therefore, in the Priests’ Code
(Lev. xxv. 39-41), the period of
servitude is extended to forty-nine
years, or the year of Jubilee.
The lengthened period of servitude
sanctioned by Hebrew law gave
rise to complications not met with
in the Code of Hammurabi. The
latter does not anticipate that
the bondmaster will find a wife for
a bondsman, or that the bond
master will seek to marry the
debtor’s daughter to himself or his
relations. The Hebrew slave could
not be sold into a foreign land, and
§ 280 emancipates slaves that have
been conveyed into another
country. The Babylonian Code is,
however, more completely on the
side of freedom than the Hebrew.
By § 175 children of a free mother
are free; by §171 children of a
free father are free; it was only
when both parents were slaves that |
the children remained in the same
status.
v-12
The Babylonian Code made no
provision for wilful homicide.
v- J3
The Code § 207 inflicts a fine of
thirty shekels for accidental homi
cide.
vSee v. 12.
v- 15
§ 195 prescribes that a son who
strikes his father loses his hand.
The Hebrew law is more severe.
v-16
§ 14. Hebrew and Babylonian
are in agreement.
v- J7
§ 192. The foster - child who
denied his foster-parents lost his
tongue.
v. 18,19 § 206. Both codes are iden
tical.
v. 20,21 The Babylonian Code only
contemplates injuries to slaves by
third parties. In § 217, however,
the owner is liable for fees for
medical attendance on a slave.
v- 22-25 gg 209-14 are more detailed
than the Hebrew, and, as the
Code only recognises the lex
talionis in the case of equals
(§ 200), the law of retaliation only
comes into force in case of the
death of a free woman.
v. 26,27 The Hebrew assesses eye or
tooth of slave at full value; the
Babylonian at only half (§ 199).
v-28
§ 250. Both legislations acquit
the owner of a goring ox; but
the Hebrew has superposed the
Bedaween idea that the animal is
accursed. The ox is to be stoned
to death, and its flesh may not be
eaten.
v. 29-32 § 251. The Hebrew law lays the
owner of a vicious ox open to the
vengeance of the relatives of the
deceased, though they are allowed
to accept a ransom if they so
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
choose. The Babylonian fixes a
penalty of thirty shekels in case of
a free man; twenty shekels for a
slave. The Hebrew assesses the
slave at thirty shekels ; and in all
cases directs the ox to be stoned.
v. 33-36 Although the Babylonian Code
does not provide for these specific
instances, §§ 53-56 make a man
responsible for injuries done to
the property of others.
xxii. 1
§ 262 would probably deal with
this if it were entire. § 8 inflicts a
thirty-fold penalty in the case of a
free man, ten-fold in the case of a
plebeian, for animals stolen from
palace or temple.
v- 2-4
§ 21. Both direct a thief caught
in the act to be slain; but the
Hebrew (like the XII. TabbS)
limits this to robbery by night.
v-5
§ 57. In both Codes trespass is
to be paid for in kind.
v- 6
See note to xxi. 33-36.
v‘7
§ 125. Both laws agree, and
both leave to the depositee the
duty of recovering the loss from
the thief.
v-8
§ 120. In both laws the sus
pected depositee has to clear him
self by oath “ before God.”
v- 9
§§9~i3- The Babylonian is the
more detailed in directing inquisi
tion into claims for lost property.
But while the Code is concerned
in tracing out and identifying the
original thief, the Hebrew legislator
merely orders the receiver or holder
of the stolen goods to refund
double.
v. 10,11
§ 266. Both laws are identical;
and in both the shepherd clears
himself by oath.
v-12
§263. The laws again agree.
v§ 244. The laws again agree.
49
v- J4
§§ 245-48. The laws agree, but
the Babylonian is more detailed.
v- 15
The Babylonian law makes no
mention of such a case as injury to
an animal in charge of its owner.
But it would probably take the
same view. The Hebrew gloss is
not very enlightening (glosses
seldom are); but it probably means
that the owner, having voluntarily
put theanimalto the work, he had no
grievance if any ill result followed.
v. 16,17 § 130. The Code agrees more
fully with Deut. xxii. 25, 26. The
regulation in Exodus implies that
the Hebrew father exacted a higher
bride-price for a virgin daughter.
Seduction rendered her less sale
able, and therefore he was given
the right to compel the seducer to
marry the girl at the full price, or
pay the difference in her value.
v. 18.
The Book of the Covenant only
inhibits a female sorcerer
From Jer. xxvii. 9 it appears that
male sorcerers were recognised in
Israel even after the publication of
Deut. xviii. 10, which forbade
them. In Isaiah iii. 3, which is
probably pre - Deuteronomic, the
cunning charmer and the skilful
enchanter are reckoned among the
notables, and the deprivation of
the services of these sorcerers is
held up as a terrible punishment.
vNot in Babylonian Code.
v-20
The Babylonian Code nowhere
inculcates religious persecution.
v-2r
The Hebrewmerelyrecommends
the Ger to the mercy of the
Israelite, while the Babylonian
Code contains a series of regula
tions in regard to the rights of the
Mushkenu.
v- 22-24 Widows and orphans are left in
E
�50
THE LA WS OF MOSES
the Hebrew to the mercy of rela
tions, and it appears from the
complaints of the prophets, Isaiah
i. 23, Ezek. xxii. 7, Mai. iii. 5, etc.,
that these unfortunates received
scant justice in Israel.
v. 25-27
§ 241. The Hebrew forbids
distraint upon necessary clothing,
but inflicts no penalty in case of
infraction. Deut. xxiv. 6 forbids
distraint upon a quern or quern
stone, but likewise inflicts no
penalty. The Babylonian extends
the provision to plough oxen, and
enforces the regulation by fine.
v. 28-31 Thereare no religious ordinances
in the Babylonian Code.
xxiii. 1-3, §§ 3,4, and 5. While the Hebrew
6-8
is merely rhetorical, the Babylonian
makes practical provisions.
The rest of Exod. xxiii. is either
religious or aphoristic, and therefore
presents no analogy with an established
code of legislation.
There is no need to suppose that the
promulgation of the Book of the Cove
nant put a stop to the influence of
external codes upon Hebrew law, and
we actually find precepts in the later
legislation of the Pentateuch which
recall ordinances of the Hammurabi
Code that are neglected in Exodus.
Thus :—
§ 3 is in greater agreement with Deut.
xix. 15-21 than Exod. xxiii. 1-8, to
which we have compared it.
§ 59 may have inspired Deut. xx. 19.
§ 60 prescribes that, when an arbori
culturist undertakes to plant an orchard,
he is to enjoy the fruit for four years,
and in the fifth year the owner comes in
and takes his share. Lev. xix. 23-25
reads very much like a blundering
reminiscence of this ordinance. For
three years the yield of the orchard is
tabu, the fourth year’s crop is sacred,
and not until the fifth year (as in the
Babylonian) does the owner appropriate
the fruit.
§ 129 agrees with Deut. xxii. 22.
§ 132. Numb. v. n-31 is essentially
the same j and in both cases the woman
is directed to undergo an ordeal by
water. The Babylonian Holy River,
however, was out of the question, for
rivers are rare in Palestine. It is
therefore replaced by the “ water of
jealousy.”
§§ 154-58. The Hebrew laws of incest,
omitted in the Book of the Covenant,
are to be found in Deut. xxvii. 20, 22,
23, and Lev. xviii. 6-18.
Several of the usages referred to in
the legends of the Hebrew patriarchs
are now seen to be in accordance with
the Hammurabi Code. Thus in Gen.
xvi. 3 the barren Sarai gives her maid
Hagar to Abram for the purpose of
raising children. In Gen. xxx. 3 Jacob’s
wife Rachel acts in the same manner;
while xxx. 9 relates the same thing of
Leah. All this is in strict conformity
with §§ 144-46 of the Code. In
Gen. xvi. 4-16 Hagar plumed herself
upon her superiority to her mistress, as
in § 146, and Sarai “ dealt hardly with
her,” as she was entitled to do by the
Code. Hagar ran away, and was sent
back home by the “ angel of the Lord,”
who directed her to submit herself to
her mistress. If the angel had been a
police officer of Hammurabi, he could
hardly have acted otherwise.
When Jacob kept the flocks of Laban
(Gen. xxxi. 38-40) he prided himself
upon having observed the Babylonian
laws laid down in §§ 262-67, and upon
the fact that he had not availed himself
of § 266 for the purpose of clearing
himself by oath in the case of damage
�THE LA JI'S OF MOSES
by wild animals. Laban, however, did
not regulate his wages by § 261.
The marriage customs of the Hebrews,
though not expressly regulated by law,
are in general agreement with Baby
lonian ideas. Exod. xxii. 15 speaks of
the bride-price, or Mohar (mistranslated
“ dowry ” in the English version). The
enamoured Shechem understood per
fectly well that a bride-price would be
expected for Dinah (Gen. xxxiv. 12),
and offered any desired amount. And
in 1 Sam. xviii. 25-27, Saul having
desired a peculiar bride-price for his
daughter Michal, David duly procured
it, and wedded the lady.
In Jud. i. 15, and the parallel
narrative in Josh. xv. ig, we have the only
mention in the Old Testament of a
dowry given with a daughter, it being
called a berakah or “ blessing,” and not
being very clearly distinguished from a
mere gift from a father to his daughter.
Lastly, in Gen. xxxiv. 12 Shechem
promises a matthan, or “gift,” corre
sponding with the Babylonian nudunnu
—i.e., a marriage settlement. It seems,
therefore, that all the ordinances of
Babylonian marriage were recognised in
Israel, although the bride-price was the
only one that received any great amount
of attention.
51
with the Babylonian, most being practi
cally identical, and the others being
quite in the Babylonian spirit. The in
ference is, therefore, that the Hammurabi Code must have been the immediate
or remote progenitor of the Hebrew legal
system.
For the sake of simplicity we have so
far regarded the “ Book of the Cove
nant ” as though it were a homogeneous
composition; but it must be evident to
every attentive student that it is nothing
of the kind. The differences of style
observable in it have been investigated
by several eminent critics, whose con
clusions have been summarised by Pro
fessor G. F. Moore.1 For our purpose,
however, it will be sufficient to indicate
merely a few of the peculiarities of the
“Book.” The way in which chapter
xxi. commences would lead one to
expect a carefully-digested corpus of law.
First we have stated the hypothetical
case of the purchase of a Hebrew slave,
and then comes an orderly considera
tion of the various contingencies arising
therefrom.
But this complete and
methodical treatment is not maintained.
The laws are mixed confusedly to
gether, so that xxi. 22-25 has become
inserted in the middle of a section
dealing with an entirely different sub
ject (verses 20, 21, and 26, 27), and
after xxii. 17 the ordinances become a
mere jumble. In fact, these three
chapters of Exodus look more like the
wreck of a code than an orderly state
ment of one.
There is also some difference in the
way in which the several laws are stated.
The greater part are put hypothetically,
as in the Code of Hammurabi (for the
These resemblances should be de
cisive. In our notes on the Ham
murabi Code we took occasion to com
pare it with an independent system of
legislation, the Laws of the Twelve
Tables; and the similarities discovered
were neither numerous nor striking. On
the other hand, in the comparison of the
Hebrew Book of the Covenant with the
Babylonian Code, the resemblances are
1 See his
simply overwhelming. Out of thirty- Encyclopediaarticle “Exodus (Book)” in the
Biblica, edited by the Rev.
two ordinances, twenty-one are in accord T. K. Cheyne, vol. ii. (London, 1901).
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
Babylonian shumma amelu, “ if a man,”
answers pretty closely to the Hebrew
'O'b “and if a man”), but in other
instances they are categorical. Thus
xxii. 18 commences “thou shalt not,”
and xxii. 19 “whosoever lieth,” in an
entirely different style to the hypotheti
cally stated enactments. Even these
latter are stated variably, some being
addressed to the pronoun of the second
person, and others (in the style of the
Babylonian Code) being referred to the
third person. Thus xxii. 25, “If thou
lend money,” should be contrasted with
xxii. 1, “If a man shall steal an ox.”
A further peculiarity in these two hypo
theses is that in the one God is repre
sented as speaking directly, while in the
other he is referred to as a third party.
Thus xx. 25, “If thou make me an altar
of stone”; but in xxi. 6, “his master
shall bring him unto God.” If, now, we
separate the sections which speak of the
third person, in the Babylonian style,
we shall find they consist of the follow
ing : xxi. i-n, 14, 18-36; xxii. 1—17 ;
and these are the passages that agree
best with the Code of Hammurabi!
It is evident, therefore, that the verses
in question are fragments of an early
Hebrew book of laws which was derived
from the Babylonian Code. The frag
ments are preceded and introduced by
the words, “ And these the mishpatim
which thou shalt set before them.” The
word
mishpatim, “judgments,”
answers to the Babylonian dinani, for
the Semitic root
to judge, only
exists in Hebrew in poetical passages,
being replaced for ordinary purposes by
which is peculiar to the Phoenician
branch. Hammurabi calls his Code
Dinani mesharim, “ judgments of
justice”; the Hebrew legislator calls
the old Hebrew Code mishpatim, “judg
r=
ments ”; and the Psalmist speaks of the
’’ZOOtDO, “judgments of justice,”
just like the Babylonian (Ps. cxix. 7, 62,
164); so that the technical phrases are
practically identical.
The discovery of the Code of Ham
murabi, therefore, enables us to place
the criticism of the Book of the Covenant
upon a fresh and sound basis. It is
now perfectly clear that the compiler of
the “ book ” adopted such of the older
laws as suited his purpose, and added
to them sundry regulations of a ritual
character, together with precepts of the
kind that have been popular with
moralists of all ages, from the counsels
of Ptah-hotep1 (3500 b.c.) to the copy
books of the twentieth century. The
science of jurisprudence must have been
at a very low ebb in Palestine when
such a compilation as the Book of the
Covenant was possible. The laws them
selves are treated as quite subordinate,
and the interest of the compiler centres
in theological matters, such as the proper
methods of sacrifice and the regulation
of the periodic festivals. In the later
systems of Pentateuchal legislation this
tendency is progressively increased.
The Book of Deuteronomy cannot
conceal its entire dependence upon the
Book of the Covenant for its legal
matter; and the additions made are
merely religious and sermonistic. Even
Canon Driver sums up the characteristics
of the later codes as follows :2
“From a literary point of view Deu
teronomy (disregarding the few short
passages belonging to P, and the two
poems in chs. 32, 33) consists of a code
1 The Precepts of Ptah-hotep: the Oldest Book
in the World, by M. Phillipe Virey. Records of
the Past, new series, vol. iii., p. 16.
a Article “ Law ” in the Dictionary of the
Bible, edited by Tames Hastings, vol. iii. (Edin
burgh, 1900).
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
of laws accompanied by hortatory intro
ductions and comments.”
“We come next to the Law of Holi
ness (H) (Lv. 17-26). This consists
substantially of an older body of laws,
which have been arranged by a later
editor in a parenetic setting, the whole
thus formed being afterwards incor
porated in P, with additions and modi
fications, designed for the purpose of
harmonising it more completely with the
system and spirit of P........ The original
nucleus of H, when compared with the
Book of the Covenant, will be seen to
deal very much less fully with civil and
criminal law. The only regulations
relating to criminal law are those in
2417-21. Those in ch. 25 might be classed
as belonging formally to civil law, but
they are regarded more properly as
expressions of religious or humanitarian
principle.”
“ The legislation of the Priests' Code
properly so called (P) is confined almost
entirely to ceremonial observances, espe
cially those relating to sacrifice and
purification.”
In other words, the successive codes
of the Pentateuch display greater and
greater sacerdotalism as time goes on.
It was entirely owing to the influence of
the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi
that the religious system of the Old
Testament was cast into a legal form at
all. The Hebrew language itself bears
witness to the knowledge of codes of
law engraved upon stone, like the pillar
found by M. de Morgan at Susa. Dr.
Driver,1 who of course knew nothing at
that time of the Hammurabi Code,
points out that the Hebrew pn, khoq,
and Hpn, khuqqah, “statute ” or “ ordi
53
nance,” are derived “ from ppPT, to cut
in, inscribe, engrave, and therefore denote
properly something engraven on stone or
other durable surface, though applied in
usage to any kind of fixed ordinance.
It was a common practice in antiquity
to engrave laws upon slabs of stone or
metal and to set them up in some public
place—and the same custom is pre-supposed
in the use of these two words in Hebrew.”
Hence, therefore, when the Elohist
writer of Exodus wished to describe the
legislation which he alleged had been
supernaturally delivered to Moses, the
legislation presented itself to his mind
as something engraven upon stone, upon
“ the two tables of the testimony,” as
the English Version calls them—though
HT-IV is more correctly “ precept ” or
“ law.” “ Tables that were written on
both their sides; on the one side and
on the other were they written. And
the tables were the work of God, and
the writing was the writing of God ”
(Exod. xxxii. 15, 16).
The Israelites did not preserve all the
Babylonian laws; some were inappli
cable, others implied a more advanced
state of civilisation and morality than
was to be found in the kingdoms of
Israel and Judah.
The military regulations (§§ 26-41)
did not obtain in Israel, because, as far
as we know, the kings had no bodies of
feudal vassals settled upon crown lands;
although they did have bands of foreign
mercenaries in their pay (2 Sam. xx. 7).
Every able-bodied Israelite was expected
to serve as a soldier, and to appear fully
armed whenever called out by general
levy (1 Sam. xi. 7).
The land regulations (§§ 42-56) are
not represented in the Pentateuchal
1 Article “Law” in the Dictionary of the legislation, although there were large land
Bible.
holders (Is. v. 8) who must have farmed
�54
THE LA WS OF MOSES
out their estates; and there was some
amount of irrigation, though, of course,
not on the scale practised in the valley
of the Euphrates. §§ 60-65 have also
disappeared from Hebrew jurisprudence,
with the exception of the apparent
reminiscence in Lev. xix. 23-25, of
which we have already spoken.
The Jew’s of the Old Testament were
not a mercantile race, hence §§ 100-10 7
were unnecessary. Agriculture was the
staple industry, and all commerce was
in the hands of the Phoenicians ; Isaiah
xxiii. 8 even using the word “Canaanite”
as a synonym for merchant.
The most noteworthy omission, per
haps, is in regard to the laws of in
heritance. The provisions of the Ham
murabi Code seem very complete and
very equitable ; but the Hebrew laws are
just the reverse. We can only learn that
Israelitish sons divided the paternal
possessions equally among themselves,
except that the eldest-born took a double
share (Deut. xxi. 15-17). Daughters
-only inherited upon failure of sons : and
if there were neither sons nor daughters,
then the brother of the deceased suc
ceeded (Num. xxvii. 4-11). In any
<ase, the widow had no claim on the
estate. In early times, at any rate, she
was herself considered part of the pro
perty of the deceased, and dealt with
accordingly; as was the custom among
the heathen Arabs down to the advent
of Muhammad (2 Sam. xvi. 20, iii. 7),
and the tenth commandment enumerates
the wife together with the house, the ox,
the ass, and the other property of one’s
neighbour. Even the Book of the
Covenant has no provision for the widow
and the orphan—they are merely recom
mended to mercy (Exod. xxii. 22), like
the Ger or stranger ; and we may see by
the frequent prophetical denunciations
that the condition of the widow and the
fatherless was a standing grievance in
Israel. A comparison of Babylonian
law with Hebrew custom will show how
far the Jews had fallen below the moral
standard of the subjects of Hammurabi.
Adoption, which occupies such a large
place in the Code (§§ 185-193), is not
referred to in the Jewish Law; but is
replaced by the curious provision of the
Levirate, which treats the wife as a mere
child-bearing machine (Deut. xxv. 5-10).
The Navigation Laws (§§ 234-240)
were, of course, useless to the Israelites,
who were not a maritime people. And
the scales of fees and wages would be
unenforceable out of Babylonia itself.
As already indicated, the additions of
the Hebrew legislators were almost
entirely of a theological character. The
basic ideas of the Hammurabi Code are
civil right and solid justice; and, con
sidering the times and the circumstances,
these are very well realised by the Code.
The king makes much of his devotion to
the gods and the blessings they have
bestowed upon him; but theology is
rigidly excluded from the Code itself.
The deities are only called in to decide
by the Ordeal in cases where human
insight fails (§§ 2 and 132), or to
guarantee an oath where human evidence
is wanting. In the Pentateuch, on the
other hand, the theological interest is
paramount. The principle of religious
persecution is introduced from the very
first, being inculcated even in the Book
of the Covenant; whereas religious per
secution was entirely unknown in Baby
lonia, not only in the Code of Hammu
rabi, but throughout the whole range of
cuneiform literature, as far as we are
acquainted with it at present. Num.
xxxi. 17-24 is a typical instance of the
ideal Pentateuchal combination of blood-
�Sag
gE
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
thirstiness and ceremonial zeal; and one
of the objects of the completed Torah is
the establishment of a theological reign
of terror. The same penalty is prescribed
for petty infractions of ritual as for the
gravest crimes ; and the Priests’ Code is
a wearisome litany of “ that soul shall be
cut off from his people.” Unauthorised
compounding of oil or incense is punish
55
able with death (Exod. xxx. 33, 38), so
is neglect of the Passover (Num. ix. 13),
Sabbath-breaking (Exod. xxxv. 2), or
even doing “ aught with an high hand ”
(Num. xv. 30). The fierce and senseless
intolerance of the Laws of Moses forms
a significant contrast to the judicial
dignity of the Laws of Hammurabi.
Appendix A.
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
Although we call the Southern
Euphrates Valley by the name of
Babylonia, Babylon was not always the
capital of the country, In the earliest
period the great cities were more or less
independent, and every now and then
one or other rose to pre-eminence, and
acted as suzerain over the others for a
greater or lesser period of time. These
Struggles eventually resulted in the
supremacy of the king of Babylon ; and
we have described in Chapter III. how
this supremacy was finally established by
the overthrow of Rim-Sin by Ham
murabi. Babylon thereafter remained
the capital of the country until 538 b.c.,
when Nabonidus, the last native
monarch, was deposed by Cyrus the
Great.
In 1881 Dr. Pinches published a
cuneiform tablet which, in its complete
state, gave lists of the kings of the
various Babylonian dynasties. It was
then found that Hammurabi was not the
founder of a dynasty, but was the sixth
member of a line of kings reigning in
the city of Babylon. The family of
Hammurabi is therefore styled the First
Dynasty of Babylon.1 This dynastic
tablet has, however, been supplemented
by other records, detailed by Dr. King
in Vol. iii. of his Letters of Hamm/urabi.
Although the succession of the First
Dynasty of Babylon and the lengths of
the individual reigns are thus deter
mined, there is as yet no certainty as to
the dates when these kings flourished.
The nearest approximation is to be
derived from an inscription of the
Assyrian king Assurbanipal (668-626
b.c.),2 and two inscriptions of Nabonidus,
the last king of Babylon (555-538 B.c.p
Assurbanipal informs us that, in the
early part of the year corresponding with
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. i.,
P- *3
2 History of Assurbanipal, by George Smith
(London, 1871), p. 250 and p. 381.
3 Historische Texte des neubabylonischen
Reichs. Schrader’s Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek (Berlin, 1890), Band iii., 2 Halfte, pp. 91
and 96.
Bg
w
8£
8
&
n
is
�56
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
652 B.c., he sent an embassy to the king son of Kudur-Bel, no king had built, its
of Elam, demanding the restitution of a old foundation-stone I sought, and I
venerated image of Nana, the goddess of saw, I examined; and upon the founda
Erech, which had been carried away to tion-stone of Shagashalti-Buriash, the
Susa 1,635 years before by “ Kudur- son of Kudur-Bel, I laid its foundation
Nankhundi, the Elamite, who the and made firm its brickwork. This
worship of the great gods did not fear.” temple I built anew, I completed its
The deportation of Nana thus took design.”
place' in 2287 b.c., and therefore a
Thus Shagashalti-Buriash lived 800
serious invasion of Southern Babylonia years before Nabonidus—say, 1345 B.c.
must have been made by the Elamites He was a member of a dynasty of
in that year. It is tempting to link this Kassite kings which ruled in Babylon
event with the fact that Rim-Sin was of some five or six hundred years.
Elamite descent. His father, KudurAnother monarch of the same dynasty
Mabug, was “ adda” of Emutbal and is mentioned in a further inscription of
Martu. Emutbal was a province of Nabonidus, discovered at Ur: “The
Elam; but he could only have gained foundation-cylinder of Hammurabi, the
the dominion over Martu (Southern ancient king, who, 700 years before
Babylonia) by conquest. As Rim-Sin Burna-Buriash had built E Babbara, and
reigned at least thirty-seven years (see the tower, upon the old foundation for
p. 11), and was overthrown in the thirty- Shamash, I looked upon it and I feared.”
first year of Hammurabi, he must have
Burna- Buriash, therefore, lived 700
commenced his sovereignty seven years years after Hammurabi; but the question
before the latter monarch. To this remains, what was the date of Burnamust be added the princedom of his Buriash ? We can only say that this
father; but we have no knowledge as to monarch was one of the correspondents
how long Kudur-Mabug ruled over of Amenophis III. and Amenophis IV.
Martu. From the lack of monuments it in the Tell-el-Amarna tablets, and these
may have been only a few years.
Egyptian kings reigned about 1450 b.c.
Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, Consequently, the date of Hammurabi
devoted himself very largely to reno was somewhere about 2150 b.c. Nabo
vating the ancient temples of his nidus speaks in round numbers, and we
dominions. Among others, he rebuilt cannot be absolutely certain for a year or
the temple of Anunit at Sippara, and we two. This date of 2150 b.c. does not
may quote from his cylinder inscription : synchronise with the figures derived
“ For Anunit, the mistress of battle, from the invasion of Kudur-Nankhundi
bearer of the bow and quiver, who in 2287 b.c.; but at the same time it
fulfils the command of Bel, her father, must be admitted that the chronology of
who sweeps away the foe, who destroys this period is so entirely hypothetical
the wicked, who marches before the that the latter date is by no means
gods, who at sunrise and sunset has excluded.
blessed my endeavours, E Ulbar, her
Nabonidus seems to have been in
temple which is in Sippara of Anunit, possession of trustworthy information in
which for 800 years, since the time of regard to the reigns of his predecessors
Shagashalti-Buriash, king of Babylon, from very early times, and where it has
�GENESIS XIV.
been possible to check his figures the
dates mentioned in his inscriptions have
proved correct.
The Assyrian king
Assurbanipal must also have had
equally good authority for his chrono
logical calculations ; and it may, there
fore, be expected that further discoveries
will enable us to settle the exact period
of Hammurabi’s reign.
But for the
present it will be seen that the data are
much too vague.
However, if we assume that the reign
of Hammurabi ended in 2150 b.c., we
get the following scheme for the first
dynasty of Babylon, premising only that
the dates b.c. are theoretical, and are
57
merely given for convenience in reckon
ing
B.C.
2295 Sumu-abu, founder
of the dynasty,
reigned 14 years
2281 Sumu-la-ilu,
his son,
36 J)
n
his son,
2245 Qabium,
»
14 J,
2231 Apil-Sin,
his son,
18 5,
2213 Sin-muballit,
his son,
2<y 5 9
n
his son,
2193 Hammurabi,
43 99
2150 Samsu-iluna,
his son,
>>
38 99
2112 Abi-eshu’,
his son,
28 99
2084 Ammi-ditana,
his son,
37 99
22 99
2047 Ammi-zaduga, his son,
n
2025 Samsu-ditana, his son,
3i 99
11 kings of the First Dynasty
of Babylon reigned 301 years
Appendix B.
GENESIS XIV.
The earlier school of Assyriologists were
led into many errors through paying too
much regard to the fables of classical
writers such as Ctesias and Herodotus.
But though these authors have long been
given up as misleading, the ignis fatuus
of the fourteenth chapter of Genesis still
flickers over the field of Assyriology. If
it were not for Gen. xiv., many com
monly-made assertions would never have
been invented, and Babylonian history
would have been more sober and less
imaginative. It is difficult to under
stand why this chapter should have had
such a hypnotising effect, for its fictitious
nature is its most obvious characteristic.
The well-known Orientalist Professor
Noldeke demonstrated its unhistorical
nature half a century ago, and his con
clusions have never been refuted? In
fact, it is somewhat a slur on one’s intel
ligence to have it presented as possessing
any historical value whatever. The
string of awe-inspiring names which it
offers in the English version is largely
due to the fact that the Hebrew is left
untranslated. By rendering all the un
intelligible words, as is done in the
following, the real character of the narra
tive may be better appreciated.
“ And it was in the days of Amraphel,
king of Shin‘ar, Ary ok, king of Ellasar,
Kedorla'omer, king of Elam, and Tid'al,
1 “ Die Ungeschichtlichkeit der Erzahlung
Gen. xiv.” Untersuchung zur Kritik des Alten
Testaments, von Theodor Noldeke (Kiel, 1869).
�58
GENESIS XIV.
king of nations, they made war upon
Son-of-Evil,1 king of Sedom, and upon
Son-of-Wickedness, king of ‘ Amorah,
Tooth-of-the-Father, king of Earth,
Shmeber, king of hyaenas and king of
devouring (she is small). All these con
federated to the Plain of Demons (it is the
Salt Sea). Twelve years they served Kedorla'omer, and thirteen years they rebelled,
and in the fourteenth year came Kedorla'omer and the kings who were with
him, and they smote the Shades in
Astarte of the two horns and the Zuzes
in them, and the Terrors in the Plain of
the Cities, and the Cave-dwellers in the
high rough mountain [or, high mountain
of the Satyr] until the Oak of Paran
which is above the desert. And they
returned, and they came to the Well of
Judgment (it is holy), and they smote
all the field of the Amalekites and also
the Amorites, the dwellers in the
Pruning of the Palm-tree.”
Dr. Noldeke points out that the Sa
maritan Pentateuch, instead of Shmeber,
has
= “ the name is lost,” a
somewhat significant reading if it be the
true one. There are other variations
in the Septuagint; but they probably
merely indicate that the LXX. trans
lators were puzzled over the outlandish
names.
The scene in the story is laid in the
Vale of Siddim. This should most
probably be Shedim (the difference in
the Hebrew is merely a dot on the UJ)
—i.e., “demons,” as in Deut. xxxii. 17,
and Psalm cvi. 37. The foes smitten
by Chedorlaomer are of a suspiciously
eschatological character. The Rephaim
are the Shades of the Dead, as in Isa.
xiv. 9, Ps. lxxxviii. 10, etc. The Emim
are the “Terrors of Death,” as in Ps.
lv. 4. And as the sepulchres of Pales
tine are almost universally rock-hewn
tombs, the “cave-dwellers” would be
the dead lying in such receptacles. The
two-horned Astarte and the Plain of the
Cities remind us that the ruler of the’
Babylonian Hades was the Queen
Allatu, who resided in a great city, or
rather seven concentric cities with
separate gates, through which the dead
must pass. Shmeber, king of hyaenas
and the king of devouring, gives a
ghoulish suggestion of Oriental grave
yards ; and the Zuzim and Paran and
Sodom and Gomorrah would probably
be more intelligible if we possessed a
completer knowledge of Hebrew es
chatology. The Seir of verse 6, in
company with the other mythological
surroundings, is probably the Satyr of
Lev. xvii. 7, Isa. xxxiv. 14, etc.
The forces led by Abram against
these vanquishers of phantoms were not
large. “ Three hundred and eighteen ”
born in his house. And these 318 can
be reduced to one—the famous Eliezer
(Gen. xv. 2).
The letters of the
Hebrew alphabet have each a numerical
value; and if we write down the name
Eliezer in Hebrew characters, and add
up the numerical values of these char
acters, the result is 318 !
£
=
X
7
=
3°
1
=
10
V
=
7°
T
=
7
—
200
318
In view of all these facts, it would require
a great amount of evidence to prove that
1 The Jewish doctors themselves recognised there was anything of an historical
that the *1 of Bera and Birsha was the contrac
nature in Gen. xiv.; and it is somewhat
�GENESIS XIV.
heedless to add that no evidence has yet
been offered for the historicity of this
chapter. The section belongs to the
Priests’ Code—that is, the latest stratum
of the Pentateuch; and the narrative
was constructed by someone familiar
with the Hebrew alphabet, for the names
of th© foreign kings in verse i are care
fully arranged in the order of that
alphabet; and Bera and Birsha, and
Shinab and Shemeber, are coupled
together because they begin with the
same letter. As these people are there
fore artificial in their arrangement, they
are probably equally artificial in their
origin; and it is a mere waste of time to
seek for them in the field of history.
The kernel of the chapter is in the
twentieth verse, “And he gave him a
tenth of all ”; and its object was thus to
support the priestly impost of tithes.
Nevertheless, ever since scholars began
to decipher the cuneiform inscriptions it
has been a favourite, though futile,
amusement to seek for names upon the
monuments bearing some remote resem
blance to those in Gen. xiv.; and
schemes of chronology have even been
framed to bring these names into accord
with the age of Abraham. Seeing, how
ever, that the age of Abraham is an
exceedingly uncertain quantity, such
chronologies have not been found to be
of any value.
It has occasionally been announced
that “ Chedorlaomer, king of Elam,” has
been found upon the monuments; but
up to the present all such discoveries
have proved to be errors in reading the
cuneiform.1
Arioch, king of Ellasar, has been at
various times identified with several
eastern potentates who have eventually
59
had to be acquitted of any connection
with him. The present fashion is to
equate him with Rim-Sin of Larsam. It
requires the eye of faith to perceive the
likeness between Ellasar and Larsam.
The name we transcribe “ Rim-Sin ” is
somewhat of a cuneiform puzzle. It is
found written Rim-En-zu, Rim-Agu,
Arad-En-zu, and Arad-Agu ; and it was
at one time maintained that these were
all different people, until Mr. George
Smith established their identity. En-zu,
“lord of wisdom,” and Agu, “crowned,”
are both appellations of the Moon-god,
Sin. In Semitic Babylonian En-zu is
always read as Sin, the Moon-god; and
it is to be presumed that Agu is to be
treated in the same way. We are thus
left with Rim-Sin and Arad-Sin. As the
cuneiform interchanges Rim with the
character for “ servant ” (in the Semitic
construct case arad), it would appear
that in this particular case rim is syno
nymous with “servant.” For the purpose
of comparing the name with Arioch, the
first element has been read as Eri or Iri,
and this procures the form Eri-Agu (or
Eri-Aku), but ignores the second form
of the divine name, for no one has pro
posed to read Eri-En-zu. It will be
seen, therefore, that the reading Eri-Aku
is in the highest degree precarious, and
in the present state of Assyriological
knowledge the only safe rendering
appears to be Rim-Sin.
As Shinar is several times used in the
Old Testament for Babylonia, or some
part of it, sundry kings of Babylon have
been equated with Amraphel. Ham
murabi is the chief favourite at present.
The first consonant of his name is the
German Ch, very often transcribed Kh.
Thus we get the form Khammurabi.
1 For a recent instance see King’s Letters of Orientalists, however, prefer the phone
Hammurabi, vol. i., p. xviii.
tically superior method of employing
�6o
RELICS OF EARLIER BABYLONIAN LA WS
one letter only for each sound, and
write Kh as /z, with a diacritical mark
beneath. Hence Hammurabi, which
need offer no difficulty if we remember
that the Assyrian h was a guttural. In
one single case a tablet has been found
to spell Hammurabi as Ammurabi.
This, of course, is merely one of the
many instances of reckless spelling on
the part of the cuneiform scribes, who
had no standard etymological dictionaries
to guide them. But upon this slender
basis is built the theory that Amraphe(l)
is Ammurabi in disguise, the I having
been tacked on in some unaccountable
manner.
It is the fourteenth chapter of Genesis
which influences the bringing into the
neighbourhood of the Mediterranean of
the names of some of the places men
tioned on Babylonian inscriptions. Many
of these names are difficult to decipher,
and still more difficult to locate. The
father of Rim-Sin is called adda Martu,
presumed to mean “ lord of the West
land.” There was a Babylonian deity
named Martu, so that it is improbable
that the “ West-land ” was far from
Babylonia. But we often find in modern I
books that Martu is translated as
“ Phoenicia ” or “ Syria ” without a word
of explanation; and the uninstructed
reader is misled into the idea that there
is some certainty in making Martu the
Far West. There is, however, nothing
in the cuneiform inscriptions themselves
to preclude the idea that Martu was
simply south-western Babylonia; and
when we find, as noted on p. 21, that
Siniddinam, the vassal king of Larsam,
was officially styled Governor of Martu,
there is hardly need to seek for the place
elsewhere.
It is, therefore, quite unnecessary for
us to trouble ourselves about the asser
tions that have been so freely made as
to the alleged contemporaneity of Abram
and Hammurabi; or the presumed rela
tions of the early Babylonian kings with
Palestine. It has yet to be shown that
the author of the Priests’ Code (about
the 5th century b.c.) possessed any
knowledge of the early Babylonian
history of 1,500 years before his time;
or that the kings of Elam made ex
peditions to smite Rephaim in this
world, whatever they might do in the
next.
Appendix C.
RELICS OF EARLIER BABYLONIAN LAWS
The Akkadian language ceased to be
spoken in Babylonia about 2000 b.c.,
but as its literature was the foundation
of the Semitic-Babylonian culture, and
as Akkadian had become a kind of
sacred tongue, it was studied and
taught as long as the Babylonian
religion and civilisation lasted. The
great text-book of the language was a
series of ten or twelve tablets entitled
Ana ittishu, “ In his station,” from the
opening words of the first volume.
�RELICS OE EARLIER BABYLONIAN LA WS
The work consisted essentially of speci
mens of the Akkadian language, accom
panied by a Semitic-Babylonian trans
lation.
Among the specimens are
several paragraphs which are evidently
ancient legal enactments, their antiquity
being guaranteed by the fact that they
are in the Akkadian language.
The
tablet containing these fragments of laws
is numbered K 251 in the British
Museum collection, and has been fre
quently translated and published.1 The
following version will serve to show the
character of this primitive Akkadian
legislation:—
1. If a son says to his father, “Thou
art not my father,” they shall brand him,
and fetter him, and sell him as a slave
for silver [compare Hamm. Code, §§
192, 226, 146].
2. If a son says to his mother, “ Thou
art not my mother,” his face they shall
61
brand, from the city they shall banish
him, from the house they shall drive
him.
3. If a mother says to her son, “ Thou
art not my son,” house and goods shall
she forfeit.
4. If a wife hates her husband and
says, “Thou art not my husband,”
into the river they shall throw her
[compare H. Code, §§ 142, 143].
5. If a husband says to his wife,
“Thou art not my wife,” half a mina
of silver he shall weigh out to her
[compare H. Code, §§ 137-40].
6. If a man hires a slave, and he
dies, or is rendered useless, or is caused
to run away, or is caused to rebel, or
is made ill, then for every day his
hand shall measure out half a qa of
corn [compare H. Code,
245-48, 199,
252].
1 Trans. Socy. Bib. Archceology, vol. viii., p. 230.
�GENERAL INDEX
Adad (God), 38
Adoption, 54
Akkadian, 10, 60
Alphabet, 44, 58
Amraphel, 57, 59
Anu (God), 34
Anunnaki, 34
Appeal, 9
Arioch, 57, 59
Army, 38
Arrest, 9
Artisans, 41
Assur, 14, 35
Assurbanipal, 5, 7, 55, 57
Fate, 36
Feudalism, 38
Fragments of Code, 5, 7, 39
Free man, 36
Ger, or stranger, 47, 49
God, Before, 47, 49
Goring ox, 48
Guarantors, 42
Hammurabi, 9, 10 ff, 45,
55 ff> 59
Hebrew language, 43, 52, 53
Herodotus, 40, 57
Holiness, Law of, 45, 53
Homicide, 43, 48
Babylon, 7, 11, 13, 14, 3°, 55
Black-headed men, 13, 30, 35
Idioms, 36
Blood-feud, 43
Incendiary, 38
Boat, 38, 42
Incest, 40, 50
Bondage, 48
Inheritance, 40, 54
Branding, 42
Bribery, 37
Jubilee, 48
Bride-price, 40, 49, 51
Judges, 8, 9
Burna-Buriash, IO, 44, 45, 5^
Carthage, 40
Cataract, 41
Chedorlaomer, 57, 59
Chronology, 10, 45, 55-57
Commandments, 46, 54
Contract tablets, 5, 8
Corn, 32, 37, 38
Correspondence of Babylonian
monarchs, 9, 12, 44
Covenant Book of, 45-51
Creation,, 46
Cuneiform, 1, 2, 44
Currency, 37
Dating, Systems of, 8, 10, 11
Debtors, 39
Deposit, 49
Destiny, 36
Deuteronomy, 45, 52
Distraint, 42, 50
Dowry, 40, 51
Elam, 7, 56, 57
Elders, 8
Eliezer, 58
Emutbal, II, 12, 56
Erasure on pillar, 6, 7, 39, 42
Estates of Babylonia, 36
----- of Israel, 47
Khallabi, 35
Kingdom of Hammurabi, 35
Kudur-Mabug, II, 56
Kudur-Nankhundi, 56
Labourer, 36
Larsam, 7, 11 ff, 13, 59
Law, 9 ff, 34
Lawsuits, 9
Levirate Law, 54
Marriage, 40, 51, 61
Martu (South-western Baby
lonia), 11, 12, 56, 60
Measures, 37, 38, 39
Military service, 38, 53
Monotheism, 37
Morality, 53, 54
Navigation, 54
Nineveh, 14, 35
Oaths, 8, 9
Orchards, 50
Ordeal, 37, 50, 54
Orphans, 49, 54
Palace, 37
Persecution, 49, 54
Pillar of Susa, 6
Plebeian, 36
Priestesses, 40
Priesthood, 8
Priests’ Code, 45, 53, 59, 60
Procedure, 8-10
Ransom, 38
Rent, 38
Rephaim, 58-60
Repudiation, 61
Retaliation, 41, 48
Rim-Sin, 5, n, 12, 55 ff, 59
Samsu-iluna, 5, 12
Satyr, 58
Scribes, 8
Settlement, Marriage, 40, 51
Shaddai, 34
Shagashalti-Buriash, 10, 56
Shamash, 6, 34
Shemeber, 58
Shutruk-Nakhunte, 7
Siddim, Vale of, 58
Silver as currency, 37
Sin-iddinam, 12, 60
Sin-muballit, II, 14
Sippara, 7, 13, 33, 35, 56
Six days of Creation, 46
Slaves, 36, 42, 48, 61
Sorcery, 37, 49
Stroke of God, 42
Supervision of justice, 9
Symbols, 38
Temple, 35, 38
Theft, 38, 49
Thunder, 38
Tithes, 59
Tonnage, 42
Trade, 39
Trees, 39
Trespass, 39, 49
Tribunal, Jewish, 47
Tumour, 41
Twelve Tables, 9, 33, 37-39
4i, 5i
Weights and measures, 37-39
Widows and orphans, 49, 54
Wine, 39
Witness, see “ Elders ”
�INDEX TO CODE
(The figures refer to the Sections of the Code, PP- 13-33)
Deposit, 122-6
Harrow, 260
Desertion, 133, 136, 193
Herdsmen, 258, 261-7
Devotee, 178-80, 192, 193
Highway robbery, 22
Disinheritance, 158, 168, 169, Hire {see also “ Wages ”), 2429, 268-72
191
Distraint, 114-16, 120, 241
Homicide, 24, 153
Divorce, 137-41, 148
Horticulture, 59-65
House-breaking, 21, 125
Doctor, 206, 215-221
Dowry, 137, 138, 142, 149,162- Husband, see “Marriage”
4, 167, 171^-176^, 178-84
Drought, 48
Illegal distraint, 113, 114
Banishment, 154
Drowning, 109, 129, 133, 143, Illicit sales, 7
Bastinado, 202
Impalement, 153
155
Bennu sickness, 278
Inalienability, 37
Bequest, 38, 39, 150, 178, 179, Ear, Amputation of, 205, 282
Incest, 154-8
182
Elders, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 122
Ingratitude, 186, 192, 193
Bigamy, 135, 144, 145, 148
Enclosure, 41
Inheritance, 165-7, 173, 174,
Boat-builder, 234, 235
Enfranchisement, 117,119,1710
176a, 176b, 178-82
Boatman, 236-9
Enslavement of free persons, Interest, 48-51
Boats, 8, 234-40, 275-7
14, 54, 115-17, 141
Intimidation, 3
Branding, 127, 226, 227
Exchange, Rate of, 51, 111
Breach of promise, 159-61
Exile, 154
Judge, 5, 9, 127, 167, 168,
Breasts, amputation of, 194
Eye, 193, 196, 215, 218, 220
172a, 177
Bribery, 4
Bride-price, 138, 139, 159-61, Fallow, 43
Kallati (literally spouse}, 180
163, 164, 166
False witness, 3, 4
Brigandage, 22, 23
Farming, 42-56, 59-65, 253-6 Kidnapping, 14
Bucket, 260
Favourite son, 165
Landlord, b
Builder, 228-33, 274
Fees, 206, 215-7, 221-4
Lawsuits, 3, 4
Burglary, 21
Fiefs, see “ Military Law”
Burial in the house, 21, 227
Fines, 8,12,24,57,58, 112,114, Legal tender, c
Burning, 25, no, 157
116, 156, 160, 161, 203, 204, Legitimation, 170, 1710, 190
207-9, 211-14, 220, 225,241, Lion, 244, 266
Capital punishment, 1-3, 6247, 248, 251, 255, 259, 260 Loans, 49-52, 100-2, 106, 107
Loss by enemy, 103
n, 14-16, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26, Fire, 25
Lost property, 9-13
109, 130, 143, 153, 155, 157, Flood, 45, 46, 48, 53, 55, 56
227, 229
Flooding, 53, 55, 56
Captives, 27, 28, 32, 133-5
3
Forfeiture, 35, 37, 113, 159, 177 Maintenance, 133-5, *7
Makhirtu, 240, 276
Cattle-doctor, 224, 225
Fosterage, see “ Adoption”
Collision, 241
Malediction, 1
Foster-mother, 194
Manslaughter, 116, 207, 208
Compensation, 23, 42, 43, 54- Fraud, 265
7, 62, 63, 113, 219, 220, 225, Fugitive slaves, 15-20
Marriage, 38, 127-36, 141-53,
166, 175-7
232, 245-8, 263, 267
Metayer tenure, see “ Farm
Concubinage, 137, 144, 145, Gift, 165
183, 184
ing ”
God, Before, 8, 23, 106, 107,
Military law, 26-41
Conjugal rights, 142
120, 126
Conspiracy, 109
Minors, 7, 14, 29
Goring, 250-2
Curse, 1
Miscarriage, 209-14
“ Misfortune of the King,” 27,
Handicraft, 189
28
Damage, 120, 232, 245-8^
Hands, Amputation of, 195, 218,
Mother, 29, 177
Debt, 38, 39, 48-52, «, c, 113,
226
115, 119, 151, 152
Mukkielbitu, 240
I Harbouring, 16, 19, 20, 109
Absconder, 136
Acknowledgment of paternity,
170, 171CZ
Act of God, 249, 266
Adad (God), 45, 48
Adoption, 185-93
Adultery, 129, 133
Artisan, 188, 274
Assault, 195-214
Assignment for debt, 38, 39, 151
�64
Negligence, 42-4, 53, 55, 56,
61-3, 65, 264
Nersega, 187, 192, 193
Nurse, 194
Oath, 9, 20, 23, 103, 120, 126,
131, 240, 249
Ordeal, 2, 132
Orphan, 177
INDEX TO CODE
Repudiation, 192, 282
Respite, 13
Restitution, 9
Retaliation (lex tallows'), 4, 13,
116, 196, 197, 200, 210, 219,
230, 231
Reward, 17
Settlement, Marriage, 150,
171#, 1720, 172$
Shepherds, 57, 58, 261-7
Palace, 18, 32, 109
Ships, see “ Boats ”
Pardon, 129
Sickness, 148
Paternity, 170, Vjia
Slander, 3, n, 12, 109, 127,
Penalty, 4, 5, 12
People, Son of the, 188, 274
I32, 161
Slave, 15-20, 118, 175, 176,
Planting, 60-3
199, 205, 217, 219, 220, 223,
Plebeian, 8, 15, 16, 140, 175,
2^6, 227, 231, 252, 278-82
176a, 198, 201, 204, 208, 211,
•----- Female, 15-17, 118, 119,
216, 219, 222
141, 144, 146, 147, 170,
Pledge, 49-520
171a, 213, 214, 278-81
Priestess, no, 127, 178-82
Sorcery, 1, 2
Purchase, Illicit, 7
Spell, 2
Stolen property, see “Lost
Qadishtu, 181
property ”
Storm, 45, 48
Ransom,32
Substitution, 26
Rape, 130, 156
Sub-tenancy, 47
Rebels, 109
Receiving stolen goods, 6, 7, 10 Suspicion, 131, 132
Reclaiming land, 44, 63,
Tariff, 51, in
Rent, 45, 46
Temple, 6, 8, 32
Tenant, b
Theft, 6, 8, 25
Tongue, Amputation of, 192
Trade, 100-7
Trader, 40, 49, a, c, 100-7, 116,
118, 119, 152
Trees, 59
Trespass, 57, 58
Trust, 112, 120, 122 •
Tumour, 215, 218, 220
Unjust judge, 5
Unknown murderer, 24
Vassal, see “ Military Law”
Veterinary surgeon, 224, 225
Virgin, 181
Wages, 257, 258,261, 273, 274
Ward, 177
Warehousing, 120-26
Water-wheel, 259, 240
“Way of the King,” 26, 32. 33
Weather, 45, 48
Widow, 171^-174, 177
Wife, see “ Marriage ”
“Wife of Merodach,” 182
Wineseller, 108-10
Witchcraft, 1, 2
Witness, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 122
�Published by T. & T. CLARK, Edinburgh.
Sixth Edition now ready. Crown 8vo, cloth, is. 6d. net.
THE OLDEST CODE OF LAWS IN THE WORLD. The Code of Laws pro
mulgated by Hammurabi, King of Babylon, b.c. 2285-2242. Translated,
with Introduction and full Index, by C. H. W. Johns, M.A., Lecturer on
Assyriology, Queens’ College, Cambridge.
“The discovery and decipherment of this Code is the greatest event in Biblical Archaeo
logy for many a day. A translation of the Code, done by Mr. Johns, of Queens College,
Cambridge, the highest living authority on this department of study, has just been published
by Messrs. T. & T. Clark in a cheap and attractive booklet.”—Expository Times.
BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN LAWS, CONTRACTS, AND LETTERS. By
Rev. C. H. W. Johns, M.A., of Queens’ College, Cambridge. Large 8vo,
Y 12s. 6d. net.
“ In Mr. Johns’ Babylonian and Assyrian Laws, that book which has given so promising
a start to the ‘ Library of Ancient Inscriptions,’ there is more matter for the interpretation
of the early books of the Bible than in any commentary that has been issued for many a day
—apart, perhaps, from a Gunkel or a Driver.”—Dr. James Hastings.
THE MIRACLES OF UNBELIEF. By Rev. Frank Ballard, M.A., B.Sc.
(London). Sixth (Popular) Edition, Revised throughout. Post8vo, 2s. 6d. net.
“No book has hit the Rationalist so hard. Its very title is a victory for Christ.”—
Expository Times.
Edinburgh : T. & T. CLARK, 38, George Street.
London Simpkin Marshall, Hamilton, Kent, & Co., Ltd.
NOW READY.
80 pp., paper covers, 6d., by post 7|d.; in cloth covers, is., by post is. 2d.
THE
AGNOSTIC ANNUAL
FOR 1907
CONTENTS;—
.MERELY RELATIVE. By Eden Phillpotts.
f FORE-GLEAMS OF HUMANISM IN DANTE. By
Joseph McCabe.
THE UNFAITH OF THE CHURCHES.
By Dr.
THE MORAL FUTURE.
Charles Callaway.
By F. J. Gould.
THE FAITH OF A PANTHEIST. By J. Allanson
PlCTON.
SOCIAL MORALITY AND RELIGION: An Instance
of their Relation. By Professor A. C. Haddon.
Dr. JOHNSON AND THE COCK LANE GHOST.
By Edward Clodd.
THE CONVERSION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO
CHRISTIANITY. By A. W. Benn.
BIBLE FOLK-LORE.
Bonner.
By Hypatia Bradlaugh
THE HISTORICITY OF JESUS.
By John M.
Robertson.
London : Watts & Co., 17, Johnson’s Court, Fleet Street, London, E.C.
�Watts & Co.’s
Sixpeppy
-x
Publication
R.P.A. Cheap Reprints.
1. HUXLEY’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. (A
Selection.) With Autobiography.
2. THE PIONEERS-OF EVOLUTION. By Edward
Clodd.
3. MODERN SCIENCE & MODERN THOUGHT.
Bv Samuel Laing. With Illustrations.
4. * ITERATURE AND DOGMA. By Matthew
L
Arnold.
15. * N AGNOSTIC’S APOLOGY.
A
Stephen.
.
16. LIFE OF JESUS. By Ernest fcfcN
17. A MODERN ZOROASTRIAN. 1
Laing.
18. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHIL
OF HERBERT SPENCER. By Profc
Hudson.
5. THE RIDDLE
OF
THE
UNIVERSE.
By
Ernst Haeckel.
6. * DUCATlON : Intellectual, Moral, and Phy
E
sical. By Herbert Spencer.
7. THE EVOLUTION OF THE IDEA OF GOD.
By Grant Allen.
8. HUMAN ORIGINS. By Samuel Laing.
9. THE SERVICE OF MAN. By J. Cotter
’ Morison.
10. TYNDALL’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. (A
Selection.) With Biographical Sketch.
11. THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.
*
By Charles
Darwin.
12. EMERSON’S ADDRESSES AND ESSAYS.
13. ON LIBERTY. By John Stuart Mill.
14. * HE STORY OF CREATION. By E. Clodd.
T
19. THREE ESSAYS ON RELIGION.
Stuart Mill.
CREED OF CHRISTENDOM. By
THE APOSTLES. By Ernest Re:
PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE. I
WONDERS OF -LIFE. By Ernst l
JESUS OF NAZARETH. By Edwa.
G
* OD AND THE BIBLE. By Matthe «
THE EVOLUTION OF MAN,
I
Haeckel. Vol. I.
27. THE EVOLUTION OF MAN. Vol. II
28. HUME’S ESSAYS : I—An Inquiry <
Human Understanding. II.—An Inq
cerning the Principles of Morals.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
R.P.A. Extra Series.
1. JESUS CHRIST: His Apostles and.Disciples in
the Twentieth Century. By Count Camille de
Rijfps.SE.
2. HAECKEL'S CRITICS ANSWERED.
By
6. A NEW CATECHISM. By M. M. Mang
7. 'THE RELIGION OF WOMAN. By J
8. THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY. ByAuous
Joseph McCabe.
3. SCIENCE AND SPECULATION. Being the
Prolegomena to “The History of Philosophy.”
By G. H. Lewes.
4. NEW LIGHT ON OLD PROBLEMS. By John
Wilson, M.A.
5. ETHICS OF THE GREAT RELIGIONS. By
C. T. Gorham.
9. ETHICAL RELIGION. By W. M. Sal
10. RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION.
By
Haynes.
11, THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE WO’
Chilperic Edwards.
Various.
THE FUTURE PEACE OF THE ANGLO-1
By Major Stewart L. Murray. Wit
by Field-Marshal Earl Roberts, K. G.
HAECKEL’S CONTRIBUTION TO RELIG1
A. S. Mories.
DO WE BELIEVE? An Analysis of a Grea
Vaughan.
spondence. By J. A. HedderwiCK.
INGERSOLL’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. First
CHRISTIANITY AND RATIONALISM ON
Series. 160 pp.
The Christian Defences Answered. By
INGERSDLf S tECTURES AND ESSAYS. Second
McCabe, J. M. Robertson, F. J. Gould, a>.
Series. 160 pp.
writers.
ON THE NATURE OF KNOWLEDGE; and
THE TRUTH ABOUT SECULAR EDUCATIO
Kindred Inquiries. By Frances Wright.
History and Results. By Joseph McG
CHAMBERLAIN : A Study. By J. M. Robertson.
RIGHTS OF MAN. By Thomas Paine.
THE ORIGIN OF LIFE. A Reply to Sir Oliver Lodge.
A FEW FOOTPRINTS. By J. Passmore Eda
By JosepiT McCabe.
SOCIALISM : ITS FALLACIES AND DANGEF
Collection of Papers edited by Frederick M
THE BIBLE IN SCHOOL. By J. Allanson Picton.
*
■ The whole of the above list, with the exception of those marked with an asterisk, are supplied in doth
THE CHILDREN’S BOOK OF MORAL LESSONS.
By F. J. Gould. First Series.
THE AGE OF REASON. By Thomas Paine. With
Introduction by J. M. Robertson.
EARLY SHELLEY PAMPHLETS. By Percy
WATTS & CO,, i7, JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON,
printed by watts and co.,
17, Johnson’s
court, fleet street,
London,
e.c.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The oldest laws in the world : being an account of the Hammurabi code and the Sinaitic legislation, with a complete translation of the great Babylonian inscription discovered at Susa
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Edwards, Chilperic
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 64 p. ; 22 cm.
Series title: R.P.A. Extra Series
Series number: No. 11
Notes: Front cover features illustration of Hammurabi adoring the Sun-god. Printed in double columns. Includes bibliographical references and index. Issued for the Rationalist Press Association, Ltd. Publisher's lists inside and on back cover. Appendix A:The First Dynasty of Babylon. B: Genesis XIV. C: Relics of Earlier Babylonian Laws. Published pseudonymously. Author believed to be Edward John Pilcher. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Watts & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1906
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N205
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The oldest laws in the world : being an account of the Hammurabi code and the Sinaitic legislation, with a complete translation of the great Babylonian inscription discovered at Susa), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Hammurabi Code
NSS