DEATH, CRUELTY, HARSH, UNFAIR . . . These are some of the words that come to my mind when I think of one of the world’s oldest sets of laws, Hammurabi’s Code. This code of laws has been a controversy for many years, and the question has always been “Was It Just?” I’m going to let you in on more of what I think about Hammurabi’s Code. Hammurabi’s Code is a set of laws that the king of a small city-state called Babylon, wrote to keep everyone in order and “protect” people in the community. Hammurabi’s Code is also divided into three different parts - family law personal injury law, and property law. In my opinion, this code of laws didn’t “protect” the weak as he stated in Document B. I think in some scenarios he actually hurt the weak…show more content… As much as I would want to change this in history, I can’t travel back in time because I don’t have a time machine. Anyways, as you can see with these two laws, the free men benefit WAY more than the slaves do. Another example of unfairness are laws 209 & 213. Law 209: “If a man strikes the daughter of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver.” Law 213: “If he has struck the slave-girl of a free man and causes her to lose the fruit of her womb, he shall pay 2 shekels of silver.” Again, this demonstrates that slaves were treated way less than free men. Another unjust example of personal law is Law 218 which states “If a surgeon has operated with a bronze lancet on a free man for a serious injury, and has caused his death, … his hands shall be cut off.” To me, this law makes no sense because what if the patient the doctor used the bronze lancet on couldn’t be saved. How is that the doctor’s fault? And you work so hard to become a doctor then you get a possibly unsavable patient and you get your hands cut off? Wow, that is just completely
