Edge Rewrite
everything Source code View original
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a45477156b192c38

Jump to content

Hammurabi

This is a good article. Click here for more information.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Hamurabi)
For other uses, see Hammurabi (disambiguation). "Hamurabi" redirects here. For the video game, see Hamurabi (video game).

Hammurabi
𒄩𒄠𒈬𒊏𒁉
Hammurabi (left) receiving his royal insignia from Shamash (or possibly Marduk)[1]
King of Babylon
Reignc. 1792 – c. 1750 BC
PredecessorSin-Muballit
SuccessorSamsu-iluna
Bornc. 1810 BC
City of Babylon, Babylon
Diedc. 1750 BC (aged c. 60)
City of Babylon, Babylon
Issue

Hammurabi (/ˌhæmʊˈrɑːbi/; Old Babylonian Akkadian: 𒄩𒄠𒈬𒊏𒁉, romanized: Ḫammu-rāpi;[2] Akkadian: [xammuˈraːpʰi]; c. 1810 BC – c. 1750 BC), also spelled Hammurapi,[3][4] was the sixth Amorite king of Babylon, reigning from c. 1792 BC to c. 1750 BC. He was preceded by his father, Sin-Muballit, who abdicated due to failing health. During his reign, he conquered the city-states of Larsa, Eshnunna, and Mari. He ousted Ishme-Dagan I, ruler of the Kingdom of Upper Mesopotamia, bringing almost all of Mesopotamia under Babylonian rule.

Hammurabi is best known for having issued his law code, ostensibly a revelation from Shamash, the Babylonian god of justice. Unlike earlier Sumerian law codes, such as the Code of Ur-Nammu, which had focused on compensating the victim of the crime, the Law of Hammurabi was one of the first law codes to place greater emphasis on the physical punishment of the perpetrator. It prescribed specific penalties for each crime and is among the first codes to establish the presumption of innocence. They were intended to limit what a wronged person was permitted to do in retribution. The Code of Hammurabi and the Law of Moses in the Torah contain numerous similarities.

Hammurabi was seen by many as a god within his own lifetime. After his death, Hammurabi was revered as a great conqueror who spread civilization and forced all peoples to pay obeisance to Marduk, the national god of the Babylonians. Later, his military accomplishments became de-emphasized and his role as the ideal lawgiver became the primary aspect of his legacy. For later Mesopotamians, Hammurabi's reign became the frame of reference for all events occurring in the distant past. Even after the empire he built collapsed, he was still revered as a model ruler, and many kings across the Near East claimed him as an ancestor. Hammurabi was rediscovered by archaeologists in the late 19th century and has since been seen as an important figure in the history of law.

Name

The name of Hammurabi written in cuneiform script (ḫa-am-mu-ra-bi) in documents from his reign: copies of a foundation inscription from Larsa (top, archaizing script)[5] and one of his letters from Larsa (bottom, common script).[6]

The meaning of the name Hammurabi is a matter of debate.[7][8] The most common translation is, in Amorite or Akkadian, “the ancestor is great,” Ḫammu-rabi, divided in two parts: ḫammu(m) or ‘ammu, meaning “ancestor,” and rabi, meaning “great” or “to be great.” An alternative reading, in Amorite, translates the name as “the ancestor heals,” ‘Ammu-rāpi. M. Streck, for his part, translates ‘ammu as “paternal uncle,” which he interprets as a reference to a protective deity.[9]

This name was borne by kings contemporary with Hammurabi, the most important being Hammurabi I of Yamhad (Aleppo), as well as by other Amorite kings of Syria who reigned subsequently.[10] It was common among the Amorites for a man holding the rank of chieftain to bear a name referring to his ancestors, as connection to a lineage and dynastic continuity were essential to his legitimacy.[11]

Sources

Written Sources

The sources documenting Hammurabi’s reign are primarily written. These texts have been unearthed at archaeological sites in present-day Iraq and Syria. Some come from official excavations (notably the tablets from Mari), while many are the result of clandestine excavations, which deprives historians of precise information about the context of their discovery.[12]

These are cuneiform texts written on clay tablets, and also on stone, in two different languages: Babylonian, a dialect of Akkadian belonging to the Semitic languages family, which constituted the local language of the time; and in Sumerian, a language with no known relatives, spoken in Babylonia until the end of the 3rd millennium BC and which, during Hammurabi’s time, retained a certain prestige among the literate and scholarly classes (much like Latin in medieval and modern Europe). During the reigns of Hammurabi and his successors, however, Babylonian gradually supplanted Sumerian, acquiring the status of a scholarly language.[13]

Cuneiform inscriptions from the Hammurabi period can be divided into three categories: commemorative inscriptions, archival texts, and educational texts.[14] The first two, in particular, provide insight into Hammurabi’s reign. These written sources offer a relatively clear picture of the events that took place during the years covered by the Mari archives, corresponding to the period from the eighteenth to the thirty-second year of Hammurabi’s reign (from 1774 to 1761 BC), with the documentation being particularly extensive for the years preceding the fall of Mari. This means that political life during the second third of his reign is the best understood.[15] As for the Babylonian kingdom, the first three decades of the reign are very poorly documented, whereas for the subsequent years, written records are more abundant and diverse (notably through royal inscriptions and texts from Larsa).[16]

Commemorative Texts

Commemorative texts are issued by the royal authority and therefore reflect the official view of events. These are primarily royal inscriptions, texts celebrating the king himself, often relatively short. Hammurabi was the first king of the First Dynasty of Babylon for whom this type of text, though common in ancient Mesopotamia, has survived, and yet they all appear to date from the period following the conquest of Larsa (after 1763 BC), that is, the last third of his reign.[17]

His inscriptions primarily commemorate the construction or restoration of sanctuaries: these are so-called “foundation” inscriptions, buried beneath the monument that was the subject of the work. This would allow them to be rediscovered by later kings who, in turn, undertook to restore the building, thereby rediscovering Hammurabi’s achievements.[18][19] Nevertheless, the best-known is the Code of Hammurabi, which takes the form of a lengthy inscription celebrating Hammurabi as a just king and guarantor of equity in his kingdom, and includes legal provisions.[20]

Another type of commemorative text consists of the sovereign’s regnal years,[21][22] which also celebrate memorable events of his reign, whether pious deeds or military victories. They are essential for reconstructing the relative chronology of Hammurabi’s reign (see below)[23][24][25]

Finally, a few hymns in Sumerian and Akkadian celebrate Hammurabi.[26][27]

Archives

The archival documents take the form of cuneiform tablets written in a style that is less literary than the previous ones, and thus closer to the spoken language. Many economic and legal texts date from the reign of Hammurabi: these are extremely rich sources for reconstructing the social and economic life of the period, and can also provide some information on political history.[28] There are far more of these texts than those from his predecessors due to the expansion of the kingdom?[29] But no archives of the Babylonian royal court have been unearthed for this period.[30]

Far richer in information are the letters dating from Hammurabi’s reign, which directly concern his activities. Two collections provide documentation of great importance: one from the city of Mari in Syria, destroyed by Hammurabi in 1761 BC, where the Babylonians left behind part of the diplomatic correspondence from previous years, documenting in particular the rise to power of their kingdom; one from Larsa, following its conquest by Hammurabi in 1764 BC, which documents the activities of Babylonian officials who were in constant contact with Hammurabi to organize this province after its conquest.[31][29] In total, just over 200 letters were written by Hammurabi, making him the Mesopotamian king with the largest number of known sent letters.[32]

Non-written Sources

In comparison to the written ones, there are far fewer non-written sources regarding Hammurabi's reign. Official sculpture from this period is poorly documented. Art is known primarily in the form of terracotta plaques or cylinder seals and impressions of cylinder seals on tablets.[35] There are relatively few royal depictions dating from his reign, and from the First Dynasty of Babylon in general. The only confirmed depiction of Hammurabi is the one on the stele of his Code;[36] others are disputed.[37]

Hammurabi’s royal palace has not been identified in Babylon,[30] and, in general, the archaeological strata of the First Dynasty of Babylon are very poorly understood in Babylon itself, as they are covered by the water table and thus beyond the reach of excavations.[38]

Dating

Several factors combine to make reconstructing the chronology of Hammurabi’s reign an approximate endeavor. The dates given in the rest of this article are established by convention but are clearly inaccurate; the question is to what extent they are so.

Babylonian sources indicate that Hammurabi reigned for 43 years. The dating system used at the time was based on year names:[21][22] each year was named after a significant event that had taken place during the previous year, typically a religious act (work on a temple, the offering of a divine throne, etc.), a military victory, or the digging of a canal. The new name for the year was chosen at the end of each year.[39]

Year names of Hammurabi’s reign are all known, which makes it possible to reconstruct the major events of his reign and place them in chronological order relative to one another.[40]

Ancient texts also make it possible to synchronize Hammurabi’s reign with those of other contemporary rulers well-documented by sources: his accession occurred while Rim-Sin of Larsa and Samsi-Addu of Ekallatum and Upper Mesopotamia were in power, and the reign of Zimri-Lim of Mari took place during Hammurabi’s reign. This makes it possible to establish a relative chronology of his reign, although such synchronizations are often approximate.[41]

Establishing an absolute chronology—that is, assigning dates to Hammurabi's reign within the conventional system of year-based dating (BC)—is an even more complex matter. Several dating systems have been proposed, "chronologies" that place Hammurabi's reign at different points in time within a span of nearly two centuries, ranging from the mid-19th to the mid-17th century BC. The most commonly used system, favored both out of habit and because it is generally considered the most accurate, is the "Middle" chronology; this places the reign in the middle of that range, from 1792 to 1750 BC (or, according to a proposed revision, from 1784 to 1742 BC[42]). Under the "high" or "long" chronology, which has few remaining proponents, the reign is placed about half a century earlier, whereas under the "ultra-low" chronology, the most widely advocated alternative since the late 1990s, Hammurabi's reign would have occurred approximately a century after the conventionally accepted date.[43][44][45]

Dating of Hammurabi's reign according to the various chronologies.[46]
Long or HighMiddleShort or LowUltra-Low
1848-1806 BC1792-1750 BC1728-1686 BC1696-1654 BC

Reign

Map showing the Babylonian territory upon Hammurabi's ascension c. 1792 BC and upon his death c. 1750 BC
Location of the main sites in Mesopotamia and Syria dating from the Old Babylonian period.

Background

Hammurabi’s reign occurred at a pivotal moment in Mesopotamian history. Since the fall of the powerful empire of the Third Dynasty of Ur (or Ur III) in 2004 BC, Mesopotamia had been divided among several kingdoms ruled by Amorite dynasties. In the south, the most powerful were first Isin, then Larsa, which attempted to carry on the tradition of the kings of Ur, but without imposing their hegemony.[47]

Babylon was then merely a secondary city, situated away from the major centers and lacking a notable history, where an Amorite dynasty took root around 1880 with the accession of Sumu-la-El (1880–1845). He succeeded in carving out a kingdom that dominated several important neighboring cities (Borsippa, Kish, Kutha, Dilbat, Marad, Sippar). His successors consolidated the kingdom and thus emerged as increasingly serious rivals to Larsa.[48]

Hammurabi succeeded his father, Sin-muballit, to the throne in 1792 BC. Larsa was in a position of strength during the early part of the long reign of Rim-Sin (1822-1763 BC), who succeeded in annexing the kingdoms of Isin and Uruk. Babylon was his most threatening direct rival for hegemony over southern Mesopotamia.[49] In addition to this southern rival, Babylon had to contend on its northeastern border with the expansionist ambitions of the kingdom of Eshnunna, whose center was located in the Diyala River Valley. On the other hand, it enjoyed good relations with the strongman of northern Mesopotamia and rival of Eshnunna, Samsi-Addu (or Shamshi-Adad; 1815-1775 BC), a member of the same Amorite clan as the kings of Babylon. After spending some time as a refugee in Babylon following a period of unrest, he settled in the city of Ekallatum, on the Tigris, and within a few years established a powerful kingdom that historians refer to as the “Kingdom of Upper Mesopotamia.” As its name suggests, it dominated the entire northern part of Mesopotamia, notably incorporating the city of Assur and overshadowing the kings of the Khabur region; then, in 1792 BC, the powerful kingdom of Mari.[50]

Early Years

Hammurabi's date of birth is unknown, as is the age at which he ascended the throne. Given the length of his reign (43 years), he may have been very young at the time,[7] although it is also possible that he was already in his twenties or even thirties.[51]

The first two decades of his reign are poorly documented. Hammurabi's date of birth is unknown, as is the age at which he ascended the throne. The names given to the early years of his reign primarily refer to public works and offerings to deities. His seventh year commemorates a military victory, the capture of Isin and Uruk, territories held by Larsa, but this was clearly a short-lived raid, as both cities remained under Larsean control. His tenth year commemorates a victory over Malgium, located east of Babylon, with the support of Samsi-Addu and the king of Eshnunna; but that city remained independent.[52]

The death of Samsi-Addu in 1775 BC was followed by the rapid disintegration of his kingdom and a struggle for dominance in Northern Mesopotamia. This competition primarily involved Eshnunna and the new king of Mari, Zimri-Lim, with whom Hammurabi ultimately formed an alliance.[53]

The War Against Elam

It is from this point on that the letters unearthed at Mari provide a relatively detailed account of international relations, including those of Babylon. The kingdom of Elam, whose heartland lies in the southwest of present-day Iran (notably at Susa), and which controlled major trade routes crossing the Iranian Plateau and the Zagros Mountains, decided to expand into the Mesopotamian plain.[54] It sought to attack the first kingdom in its path, Eshnunna, and easily secured the support of various kingdoms hostile to Eshnunna, foremost among them Babylon and Mari. Elam attacked and subjugated the kingdom of Eshnunna. It established its rule over a significant portion of the Mesopotamian plain for the first time.[55] But Elam did not wish to stop there, which ultimately led to war against Babylon, Mari, and several other kingdoms in southern and northern Mesopotamia, as well as Syria, which formed a coalition to stop it.[51] The Elamites then played a double game, in order to sow discord between Rim-Sin of Larsa and Hammurabi of Babylon, just as these two eternal rivals were trying to reconcile. But the two kings uncovered the ruse, and ultimately formed an alliance, though the latter contributed little to nothing to the coalition. The Elamites, who were threatening the northern part of the Babylonian kingdom, were eventually repelled with great difficulty, thanks to the support of troops from Mari and other kingdoms of northern Mesopotamia.[51]

Major Conquests

The expansion of the Babylonian kingdom during the reign of Hammurabi and his successors.

Bolstered by this triumph and his alliance with Mari, Hammurabi adopted a more ambitious stance. In the wake of the withdrawal of the Elamite troops from Eshnunna, he sought to bring that kingdom under his control. A letter from Mari indicates that he then had the option of either simply annexing the kingdom outright or installing a member of the local royal family as a puppet ruler (with the approval of the king of Mari). But the elites of Eshnunna made the unexpected choice to enthrone a section chief—that is, a mere commoner—named Silli-Sin.[56] This led to a year of difficult negotiations between Babylon and Eshnunna to conclude a peace agreement.[57]

At the same time, Hammurabi launched a lightning war against him with the help of Zimri-Lim of Mari, citing Rim-Sin’s meager support provided against Elam and his alleged attacks by his troops on his territory, and also taking advantage of the weakening of his kingdom. He annexed his kingdom in 1763 BC. He thus gained control of the entire lower Mesopotamian plain. This was a major turning point in the history of the period, as Hammurabi succeeded where many kings had failed before him for more than two centuries.[58] The fall of the Kingdom of Larsa is recounted in several letters from Mari soldiers addressed to their king, including this one, written as the final assault was imminent and then carried out:

Regarding the besieged city of Larsa, I have already written to my lord: “All the refugees who now fall into our hands say, ‘There is no more grain in the city,’” when in fact there is grain, but without their knowledge. Instead of grain, they are receiving straw, bran, and chaff… […] After the arrival of reinforcements, the Babylonian troops entered [Larsa] and seized the walls. This morning, all the men entered. As for Rim-Sin, they brought him out alive.[59]

The ruins of the Royal Palace of Mari, destroyed by Babylonian troops.

Continuing his expansion, Hammurabi turned his attention northward. He had resolved to form an alliance with Eshnunna immediately after his victory over Larsa, and one of his daughters had married its king Silli-Sin.[60] However, shortly thereafter, he won a victory over Eshnunna, commemorated by the name given to his 32nd regnal year, which indicates that other neighboring entities (Shubartum and Gutium) were also defeated. The exact circumstances that triggered this conflict remain unknown, as does the fate of the defeated kingdom.[61][62]

He then went to war against the region’s other major power, his former ally Zimri-Lim of Mari. The rift between the two appears to have occurred rapidly, due to Hammurabi’s ambitions in the Jebel Sinjar region, which was under Mari’s influence. As a result, Zimri-Lim does not appear to have supported him in his conflict against Eshnunna; on the contrary, he seemed to favor his adversary.[63] The course of the conflict is not documented, but the outcome is clear: Mari was captured and then destroyed between 1761 BC and 1759 BC.[64] Malgium suffered a similar fate during those same years.[65]

This led to the end of the Mari archives, and the military history for the remainder of Hammurabi's reign is poorly documented. The king's year names provide insight into the events deemed most significant by the Babylonian chancery during the final decade of Hammurabi's reign. Part of the name for the 33rd year (which primarily refers to the digging of a long canal in the southern part of the kingdom) recounts Hammurabi's new military successes:

The year: Hammu-rabi, the king, […] restored Sumer and Akkad which had been scattered; overthrew in battle the army of Mari and Malgium; subjugated Mari and its villages and the many cities (of the mountain land) of Subartu, (Ekallatum, (all of) Burunda and the land of Zalmaqum on the bank of the Tigris up to the Euphrates); and caused <them> to dwell at his command in friendship.[66]

Hammurabi subsequently consolidated his hold on the north, where he defeated a coalition of kings, including those of Shubartum, Turukkum, and Gutium (Year Name 37), and then deported people from the conquered lands. In the process, he established his rule over the city of Assur.[67][64] The name of Year 39 commemorates another victory in Shubartum.[68]

According to D. Charpin, the last major potential rival in his neighborhood that had remained independent, Eshnunna, already greatly weakened, appears to have suffered destruction due to floods (mentioned in the name of the year 38) and a shift in the course of the Diyala River, which led to its abandonment.[69][70] During those years, Hammurabi primarily commemorated several major construction projects, some of which may have been intended to prevent flooding.[71]

Final years

Within a few years, Hammurabi had thus succeeded in uniting Mesopotamia under his rule. One can therefore speak of an “empire”.[72][73]

The prologue to the Code of Hammurabi, dated to the end of Hammurabi’s reign, includes a list of major cities under Babylonian control at that time, which is often used to illustrate the extent of the kingdom after this ruler’s forty-year reign. Its logic is largely religious, as it first lists city-deity pairs arranged according to a politico-theological objective: first, the deities who bestowed kingship—Enlil of Nippur, Ea of Eridu, and Marduk of Babylon; then the celestial deities Sîn of Ur, Shamash of Sippar and Larsa, An and Ishtar of Uruk. The rest follow a more geographical order: cities of central Babylonia (Isin, Kish, Kutha, Borsippa, Dilbat, Kesh), then cities along the Tigris (Lagash-Girsu, Zabalam, Karkar, Adab, Mashkan-shapir, Malgium), and finally the major cities of northern Mesopotamia that Hammurabi conquered toward the end of his reign, namely Mari, Tuttul, Eshnunna, Akkad, Assur, and Nineveh.[74]

Hammurabi died around 1750 BC, in the forty-third year of his reign. His son Samsu-iluna succeeded him. One text allows us to date the change of reign fairly precisely within the Babylonian calendar, on the tenth day of the fifth month of the year.[75]

It appears that Hammurabi died of illness, or perhaps of old age, following a period during which he was physically weakened, beginning in his fortieth year of reign.[76] R. Pientka-Hinz has suggested interpreting the commemorative works associated with his 40th year, carried out at the sanctuary of Nergal, god of the Underworld, as an indication that he was already ill at that time and that, sensing his end was near, he wished to curry favor with the lord of the afterlife, who would soon welcome him.[77][78]

A letter from his son Samsu-iluna addressed to the governor of Sippar and dated to the final moments of his reign seems to indicate that Hammurabi was seriously ill at that time and that his death was imminent, but a break in the tablet prevents the sentence from being fully reconstructed. In any case, his son appears to have been ruling the kingdom at that time (perhaps as regent) and preparing for his own accession to the throne by remitting debts owed to servants of the crown, soldiers, and private citizens (muškēnum), measures typically taken upon the ascension of a new monarch. He also summoned the governor and the Elders, local political authorities, from his province to the capital.[79][80][76][81]

Family

Hammurabi's family is very poorly known.[82][83]

None of his wives are documented, but based on the customs of his time, he must have had at least one (or even two) principal wife(s), secondary wives, and numerous concubines, with a harem, which was enlarged, notably following his military conquests.[84]

One of Hammurabi's sisters is known: Iltani, who became a nun (nadītum) devoted to the god Shamash at Sippar, a common practice among royal families of the time, serving to strengthen the bonds between kings and the gods. None of his brothers are known, but a text from Larsa seems to mention an unnamed "daughter of the king's brother," therefore a niece of a brother, perhaps who became a priestess of the god Shamash in that city.[85] From known examples in other kingdoms of his time, the sovereign's brothers were often involved at the highest level in the affairs of the kingdom.[86]

Two of his sons are attested in the archives of Mari: Sumu-ditana (the eldest son?) and Mutu-Numaha, whose names referred to ancestors of his dynasty.[87][83] They were both sent to Mari for a time as part of educational journeys, which appear to have been a custom at the time. They may also have served as hostages when the king of Mari was lending troops to Babylon.[88] The son destined to succeed Hammurabi, Samsu-iluna, is not attested during his reign. It is not known whether he is the eldest of the siblings, as he was to proclaim in one of his own royal inscriptions.[75][89]

Among his daughters, at least one in turn becomes a nun devoted to Shamash,[90] perhaps called Lamassani,[82][83] and another is married to the king Silli-Sin of Eshnunna.[91]

Personality and Political Skills

Letters from Mari, which are the only documents that depict Hammurabi through his daily actions and words, reveal him to be a skilled negotiator, reluctant to yield to the wishes of his allies, even when he needed their support.[92] While he clearly commanded an effective army, he was also a shrewd diplomat.[93] This is particularly evident in the negotiations surrounding the city of Hit, which was disputed between Babylon and Mari; these negotiations temporarily hindered an alliance between the two, despite the Elamite invasion, which directly threatened Babylon and in the face of which Babylon needed Mari’s support. The issue was left unresolved in order to allow the alliance to proceed. But this did not prevent Hammurabi from rejecting Mari’s demands and reiterating his claims to the city and their justification, namely, the fact that the city possessed the naphtha necessary for caulking ships, a crucial means of transportation in southern Mesopotamia due to its numerous waterways. This further highlights the Babylonian king's keen awareness of the importance of securing access to raw materials necessary for his country.[94][95]

Hammurabi thus knows how to use his allies to his advantage, while giving them as little as possible, a fact that Mari learned the hard way. He also ensures that his status is respected and does not allow kings of lower rank to take advantage of him.[96] For example, a letter recounts a tense audience between Hammurabi and emissaries from Ishme-Dagan of Ekallatum, a longtime ally and distant relative of Hammurabi. The exchange concerns various complaints by Ishme-Dagan, first regarding the fact that he had not received troops from Hammurabi—unlike other kings in northern Mesopotamia—despite the aid he had provided to Hammurabi in the past. This is followed by recriminations regarding Mari, which the messengers from Ekallatum apparently sought to gloss over.[97] All of this provoked several outbursts of anger from Hammurabi:

Hammurabi answered them thus: “To whom have I given troops? Tell me, tell me!” Approaching them, he repeated his question five or six times, obliging them to answer: “You gave troops to Atamrum (a king of northern Mesopotamia)!” And Hammurabi answered them: “What troops did I give to Atamrum? It was a troop of 300 or 400 men (only) that I sent to Atamrum, and the troop […] (Gap).
Hammurabi replied: “Why are you withholding the rest of your report? Tell me your full report.” They said: “[…]”… He said: “Surely there is other news you carry.” They said, “No, [we have not concealed] a secret report that your servant (Ishme-Dagan) sent you. Do not force us: our lord is spread out beneath your feet like a rug. Even if there is another king who reveres you, he does not write such messages of submission to you.”
When Ishme-Dagan’s messengers said this, Hammurabi replied to them, “Since you do not wish to complete your report, let my servant who came with you complete it!” Hammurabi summoned his servant who had come with them and said to him, “Since they do not wish to complete the report they were charged with, it is your turn! You, complete their report!”
Hammurabi’s servant who had come with them [came]; after repeating the report delivered by the messengers of Ishme-Dagan, he added to it, saying: “Zimri-Lim, to whom you have me writing as a son, is he not my servant? He does not dwell on a high throne; therefore, I have not written exalted greetings.”
When he heard these words, Hammurabi cried out, “What a scandal!” The messengers of Ishme-Dagan denied this report. […][98]

We thus gain a rare glimpse into Hammurabi’s personality, which is portrayed here as hot-tempered, impatient, and threatening toward the envoys from Ekallatum,[99] a “volatile” personality, according to K. Radner.[92]

Beyond the image of a just king that he wished to project, Hammurabi caused widespread devastation during his conquests. For this reason, P. Michalowski points out that he can be viewed as a “tyrant.”[27] On several occasions, Hammurabi ordered acts of destruction, such as the destruction of the palace at Mari, as well as the deportation of the defeated, as after the Mutiabal revolt. On the other hand, however, these were not unusual acts for his own time, and there is no indication that he was any more brutal than other kings of his era.[100]

The letters addressed to his subordinates in Larsa portray him as a king deeply involved in the affairs of his realm and close to his subjects, according to M. Van De Mieroop: "Hammurabi’s management style was very direct and the letters indicate that anyone could turn to him when facing a problem. He either rendered a verdict and directed his officials to carry out his orders, or he asked them to investigate the matter further. Nothing seems to have been too trivial for his attention. He asked about small lots of land, single servants, and so on. Some scholars have seen this as a sign that he was a petty ruler, but that is a mistaken judgment. Hammurabi properly fulfilled his functions as king. He was there for his people and all were allowed to approach him. This created a personal bond between the king and his people."[101]

According to P.-A. Beaulieu, this level of involvement may indicate that he sought to combat corruption and the formation of fiefdoms that would threaten the integrity of his state, which would then explain his success as a kingdom-builder.[102]

Did Hammurabi intend to build an empire modeled on those of the Akkadian and Ur III dynasties? It is impossible to say for certain, but judging by the course of the conquests, the existence of a carefully crafted plan from the very beginning of his reign seems unlikely. According to D. Charpin, "it is likely that the empire was the result not so much of a deliberate policy as of the skillful exploitation of successive opportunities."[103] The sequence of conquests gives the impression of a single, unplanned military campaign. The kingdom's expansion took place over just a few years, beginning with a defensive response to the Elamite invasion and continuing through a series of conflicts against major rival powers—all apparently without demobilizing his army.[93]

At the very least, this credits Hammurabi with great political acumen and the ability to make the most of opportunities presented by the highly fluid international landscape of the time. According to P.-A. Beaulieu: "It is tempting for historians to explain retrospectively the success of Babylon by highlighting economic, geographic, or environmental conditions that would have made its rise inevitable. Such factors always play a role in history, but none should be considered decisive and Hammu-rabi must also receive some individual credit. A less capable and astute leader might easily have failed, letting other cities make their bid to unify Mesopotamia under a single administration."[104]

Code of laws

Code of Hammurabi stele. Louvre Museum, Paris.

The Code of Hammurabi was a collection of 282 laws dealing with a wide range of issues.[105] It is not the earliest surviving law code[106][a] but was proved more influential in world politics and international relations[108][109] as instead of focusing on compensating the victim of crime, as in earlier Sumerian law codes, the Code of Hammurabi instead focused on physically punishing the perpetrator.[109] It was also one of the first law codes to place restrictions on what a wronged person was allowed to do in retribution[109] and one of the earliest examples of the idea of presumption of innocence, suggesting that the accused and accuser have the opportunity to provide evidence.[110] The structure of the code is very specific, with each offense receiving a specified punishment. Many offenses resulted in death, disfigurement, or the use of the Lex Talionis philosophy ("Eye for eye, tooth for tooth").[111][109]

The Code of Hammurabi was inscribed on a stele and placed in a public place so that all could see it, although it is thought that few were literate. The stele was later plundered by the Elamites and removed to their capital, Susa; it was rediscovered there in 1901 in Iran and is now in the Louvre Museum in Paris. The code of Hammurabi contains 282 laws, written by scribes on 12 tablets.[108] Unlike earlier laws, it was written in Akkadian, the daily language of Babylon, and could therefore be read by any literate person in the city. At this time, Akkadian replaced Sumerian, and Hammurabi began language reforms that would make Akkadian the most common language at this time.[112] A carving at the top of the stele portrays Hammurabi receiving the laws from Shamash, the Babylonian god of justice,[113] and the preface states that Hammurabi was chosen by Shamash to bring the laws to the people.[114]

According to one journal, Hammurabi's laws "were more humane than those of other kings of his era." During his reign, minimum wages were set up for ordinary workers while he also ruled (as noted by the same journal) "that seasonal workers should be paid at a higher rate than year-round workers."[115]

Legacy

Posthumous commemoration

Tablet of Hammurabi (𒄩𒄠𒈬𒊏𒁉, 4th line from the top), King of Babylon. British Museum.[116][117][118]

Hammurabi was honored above all other kings of the second millennium BC[119] and he received the unique honor of being declared to be a god within his own lifetime.[120] The personal name "Hammurabi-ili" meaning "Hammurabi is my god" became common during and after his reign. In writings from shortly after his death, Hammurabi is commemorated mainly for three achievements: bringing victory in war, bringing peace, and bringing justice.[120] Hammurabi's conquests came to be regarded as part of a sacred mission to spread civilization to all nations.[121] A stele from Ur glorifies him in his own voice as a mighty ruler who forces evil into submission and compels all peoples to worship Marduk.[122] The stele declares: "The people of Elam, Gutium, Subartu, and Tukrish, whose mountains are distant and whose languages are obscure, I placed into [Marduk's] hand. I myself continued to put straight their confused minds." A later hymn also written in Hammurabi's own voice extols him as a powerful, supernatural force for Marduk:[121]

I am the king, the brace that grasps wrongdoers, that makes people of one mind,
I am the great dragon among kings, who throws their counsel in disarray,
I am the net that is stretched over the enemy,
I am the fear-inspiring, who, when lifting his fierce eyes, gives the disobedient the death sentence,
I am the great net that covers evil intent,
I am the young lion, who breaks nets and scepters,
I am the battle net that catches him who offends me.[122]

After extolling Hammurabi's military accomplishments, the hymn finally declares: "I am Hammurabi, the king of justice."[120] In later commemorations, Hammurabi's role as a great lawgiver came to be emphasized above all his other accomplishments and his military achievements became de-emphasized. Hammurabi's reign became the point of reference for all events in the distant past. A hymn to the goddess Ishtar, whose language suggests it was written during the reign of Ammi-Saduqa, Hammurabi's fourth successor, declares: "The king who first heard this song as a song of your heroism is Hammurabi. This song for you was composed in his reign. May he be given life forever!"[119] For centuries after his death, Hammurabi's laws continued to be copied by scribes as part of their writing exercises and they were even partially translated into Sumerian.[123]

Political legacy

Copy of Hammurabi's stele usurped by Shutruk-Nahhunte I. The stele was only partially erased and was never re-inscribed.[124]

During the reign of Hammurabi, Babylon usurped the position of "most holy city" in southern Mesopotamia from its predecessor, Nippur.[125] Under the rule of Hammurabi's successor Samsu-iluna, the short-lived Babylonian Empire began to collapse. In northern Mesopotamia, both the Amorites and Babylonians were driven from Assyria by Puzur-Sin, a native Akkadian-speaking ruler, c. 1740 BC. Around the same time, native Akkadian speakers threw off Amorite Babylonian rule in the far south of Mesopotamia, creating the Sealand Dynasty, in more or less the region of ancient Sumer. Hammurabi's ineffectual successors met with further defeats and loss of territory at the hands of Assyrian kings such as Adasi and Bel-ibni, as well as to the Sealand Dynasty to the south, Elam to the east, and to the Kassites from the northeast. Thus was Babylon quickly reduced to the small and minor state it had once been upon its founding.[126]

The coup de grace for the Hammurabi's Amorite Dynasty occurred in 1595 BC, when Babylon was sacked and conquered by the powerful Hittite Empire, thereby ending all Amorite political presence in Mesopotamia.[127] However, the Indo-European-speaking Hittites did not remain, turning over Babylon to their Kassite allies, a people speaking a language isolate, from the Zagros mountains region. This Kassite Dynasty ruled Babylon for over 400 years and adopted many aspects of the Babylonian culture, including Hammurabi's code of laws.[127] Even after the fall of the Amorite Dynasty, however, Hammurabi was still remembered and revered.[123] When the Elamite king Shutruk-Nakhunte raided Babylon in 1158 BC and carried off many stone monuments, he had most of the inscriptions on these monuments erased and new inscriptions carved into them.[123] On the stele containing Hammurabi's laws, however, only four or five columns were wiped out and no new inscription was ever added.[124] Over a thousand years after Hammurabi's death, the kings of Suhum, a land along the Euphrates River, just northwest of Babylon, claimed him as their ancestor.[128]

A Neo-Babylonian royal inscription, which was intended for display on a stele, commemorates a royal grant of tax exemptions to nine Babylonian cities and presents the royal protagonist as a second Hammurabi.[129]

Relationship to Biblical figures and Mosaic law

Hammurabi next to Moses on the south frieze of the United States Supreme Court Building

In the late nineteenth century, the Code of Hammurabi became a major center of debate in the heated Babel und Bibel ("Babylon and Bible") controversy in Germany over the relationship between the Bible and ancient Babylonian texts.[130] In January 1902, the German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch gave a lecture at the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin in front of Kaiser Wilhelm II and his wife in which he argued that the Mosaic Laws of the Old Testament were directly copied off the Code of Hammurabi.[131] Delitzsch's lecture was so controversial that, by September 1903, he had managed to collect 1,350 short articles from newspapers and journals, over 300 longer ones, and twenty-eight pamphlets, all written in response to this lecture, as well as the preceding one about the Flood story in the Epic of Gilgamesh. These articles were overwhelmingly critical of Delitzsch, though a few were sympathetic. The Kaiser distanced himself from Delitzsch and his radical views and, in fall of 1904, Delitzsch was forced to give his third lecture in Cologne and Frankfurt am Main rather than in Berlin.[130] The putative relationship between the Mosaic Law and the Code of Hammurabi later became a major part of Delitzsch's argument in his 1920–21 book Die große Täuschung (The Great Deception) that the Hebrew Bible was irredeemably contaminated by Babylonian influence and that only by eliminating the human Old Testament entirely could Christians finally believe in the true, Aryan message of the New Testament.[131] In the early twentieth century, many scholars believed that Hammurabi was Amraphel, the King of Shinar in the Book of Genesis 14:1.[132][133] This view has now been largely rejected,[134][135] and Amraphel's existence is not attested in any writings from outside the Bible.[135]

Parallels between this narrative and the giving of the Covenant Code to Moses by Yahweh atop Mount Sinai in the Book of Exodus and similarities between the two legal codes suggest a common ancestor in the Semitic background of the two.[136][137][138][139] Nonetheless, fragments of previous law codes have been found and it is unlikely that the Mosaic laws were directly inspired by the Code of Hammurabi.[136][137][138][139][b] Some scholars have disputed this; David P. Wright argues that the Jewish Covenant Code is "directly, primarily, and throughout" based upon the Laws of Hammurabi.[140] In 2010, a team of archaeologists from Hebrew University discovered a cuneiform tablet dating to the eighteenth or seventeenth century BC at Hazor in Israel containing laws clearly derived from the Code of Hammurabi.[141]

Because of Hammurabi's reputation as a lawgiver, his depiction can be found in law buildings throughout the world. Hammurabi is one of the 23 lawgivers depicted in marble bas-reliefs in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives in the United States Capitol.[142] A frieze by Adolph Weinman depicting the "great lawgivers of history", including Hammurabi, is on the south wall of the U.S. Supreme Court building.[143][144]

Notes

  1. ↑ It is predated by the Code of Ur-Nammu, the Laws of Eshnunna, and the Code of Lipit-Ishtar.[107]
  2. ↑ Barton, a former professor of Semitic languages at the University of Pennsylvania, stated that while there are similarities between the two texts, a study of the entirety of both laws "convinces the student that the laws of the Old Testament are in no essential way dependent upon the Babylonian laws." He states that "such resemblances" arose from "a similarity of antecedents and of general intellectual outlook" between the two cultures, but that "the striking differences show that there was no direct borrowing."[137]

References

  1. ↑ Roux 1992, between 266–267.
  2. ↑ Douglas Frayne, The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Early Periods, vol. 4: Old Babylonian Period (2003–1595 BC), Toronto, 1990: 332.
  3. ↑ Khwshnaw 2023.
  4. ↑ Hone, Charles F. (1917). The Sacred Books and Early Literature of the East . Vol. 1 – via Wikisource. [scan Wikisource link]
  5. ↑ L. W. King, Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum: Plates, 1905, pl. 45
  6. ↑ L. W. King, The Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, 1898, no. 2 obverse.
  7. 1 2 Charpin 2003, p. 44.
  8. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 2–3.
  9. ↑ Michalowski & Streck 2017, pp. 384–385.
  10. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 395.
  11. ↑ Durand, Jean-Marie (2009). "Tell Hariri: Textes. V. I. Les nomades". In Jacques Briend and Claude Tassin (ed.). Supplement to the Dictionary of the Bible (in French). Vol. 14. Paris: Letouzey & Ané., col. 320.
  12. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 16–17.
  13. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 108–109.
  14. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 22.
  15. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 39.
  16. ↑ Michalowski & Streck 2017, pp. 380–381.
  17. ↑ Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 380.
  18. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 24–25.
  19. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 8–9.
  20. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 25.
  21. 1 2 Horsnell 1999.
  22. 1 2 https://cdli-gh.github.io/year-names/HTML/T12K6.htm
  23. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 22–24.
  24. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 16–17.
  25. ↑ Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 381.
  26. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 25–26.
  27. 1 2 Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 383.
  28. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 54.
  29. 1 2 Beaulieu 2018, p. 76.
  30. 1 2 Charpin 2003, pp. 36–37.
  31. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 37–40.
  32. ↑ Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 384 (summary of known letters sent by Hammurabi).
  33. ↑ Frayne 1990, pp. 354–355.
  34. ↑ https://www.archibab.fr/T850
  35. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 21.
  36. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 156.
  37. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 277 n. 1440.
  38. ↑ Radner 2020, pp. 43–44.
  39. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 23–24.
  40. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 22–23.
  41. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 36.
  42. ↑ Walther Sallaberger and Ingo Schrakamp (2015). "Philological Data for a Historical Chronology of Mesopotamia in the 3rd Millennium". In Walther Sallaberger and Ingo Schrakamp (ed.). Associated Regional Chronologies for the Ancient Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean. Vol III: History & Philology. Turnhout: Brepols. pp. 136 table 39..
  43. ↑ Charpin 2004, pp. 35–36.
  44. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 20–22.
  45. ↑ Höflmayer, Felix (2020). "Establishing an Absolute Chronology of the Middle Bronze Age". In Karen Radner, Nadine Moeller et Daniel T. Potts (dir.) (ed.). The Oxford History of the Ancient Near East, Volume 2: From the End of the Third Millennium bc to the Fall of Babylon. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 9–11.
  46. ↑ Höflmayer 2020, p. 11 table 11.2.
  47. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 62–68.
  48. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 69–74.
  49. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 75–76.
  50. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 77–78.
  51. 1 2 3 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 18.
  52. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 48–50.
  53. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, p. 79.
  54. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 15 and 16.
  55. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 17.
  56. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 226.
  57. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 227.
  58. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 83–84.
  59. ↑ https://www.archibab.fr/T7957
  60. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 226 and 324.
  61. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 326.
  62. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 84–85.
  63. ↑ Charpin 2004, pp. 325–326.
  64. 1 2 Beaulieu 2018, p. 85.
  65. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 99–100.
  66. ↑ Horsnell 1999, p. 146.
  67. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 332.
  68. ↑ Horsnell 1999, pp. 159–160.
  69. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 103–104.
  70. ↑ Charpin 2004, pp. 332–333.
  71. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 103.
  72. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 105–106.
  73. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 85–86.
  74. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 104–105.
  75. 1 2 Charpin 2004, p. 336.
  76. 1 2 Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 389.
  77. ↑ Pientka-Hinz, Rosel (2008). "Midlifecrisisund Angst vor dem Vergessen?: zur Geschichtsüberlieferung Hammu-rapis von Babylon". In Adam, Klaus-Peter (ed.). Historiography in Antiquity (in German). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1–25..
  78. ↑ Charpin, Dominique (2010). ""Sentant sa mort prochaine..."" (PDF). NABU 2010/75 (in French): 86..
  79. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 98–99.
  80. ↑ Boivin 2020, p. 615.
  81. ↑ Charpin, Dominique (2022). "Civilisation mésopotamienne" (PDF). Annuaire du Collège de France 2018-2019. Résumé des cours et travaux, 119e année (in French): 367–368. doi:10.4000/annuaire-cdf.17190..
  82. 1 2 Michalowski & Streck 2017, p. 385.
  83. 1 2 3 Rients de Boer, "The Members of the Royal House of Old Babylonian Babylon," Isin, pp. 27–43: 31, 37–38, 2021/2
  84. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 131–133.
  85. ↑ Charpin, Dominique (2018). "En marge d'Archibab, 28 : une offrande au dieu Panumundu à Larsa" (PDF). NABU 2018/14 (in French): 19.
  86. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 134.
  87. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 135.
  88. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 136–137.
  89. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 97–98.
  90. ↑ Charpin 2003, p. 137.
  91. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 138–139.
  92. 1 2 Radner 2020, p. 42.
  93. 1 2 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 78.
  94. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 160–162.
  95. ↑ Radner 2020, pp. 41–42.
  96. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 112–118.
  97. ↑ Charpin 2003, pp. 184–185.
  98. ↑ https://www.archibab.fr/T7584
  99. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 59–60.
  100. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 118–119.
  101. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 97–98.
  102. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, p. 94.
  103. ↑ Charpin 2004, p. 335.
  104. ↑ Beaulieu 2018, pp. 76–77.
  105. ↑ H. Otto Sommer (1908). The Laws of Hammurabi, King of Babylonia . Records of the Past, Volume II, Part III. – via Wikisource.
  106. ↑ Driver & Miles (1952), p. 9.
  107. ↑ Roth 1995, pp. 13, 23, 57.
  108. 1 2 Breasted 2003, p. 141.
  109. 1 2 3 4 Bertman 2003, p. 71.
  110. ↑ Victimology: Theories and Applications, Ann Wolbert Burgess, Albert R. Roberts, Cheryl Regehr, Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2009, p. 103
  111. ↑ Prince 1904, pp. 606–607.
  112. ↑ Maher, John C. (2017). Multilingualism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 108. ISBN 978-0-19-872499-5. ... Akkadian (Babylonian) replaced Sumerian ... The Code of Hammurabi was written in the daily language of Babylon, Akkadian. Hammurabi (c.1810–1750 BC), the sixth king of the First Babylonian Empire, initiated language reforms to make Akkadian the pre-eminent lingua franca of antiquity; inscriptions have been found on stone, silver and clay artefacts.
  113. ↑ Kleiner, Fred S. (2010). Gardner's Art through the Ages: The Western Perspective. Vol. 1 (Thirteenth ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-495-57360-9. Archived from the original on 17 June 2014. Retrieved 1 November 2020.
  114. ↑ Smith, J. M. Powis (2005). The Origin and History of Hebrew Law. Clark, New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. p. 13. ISBN 978-1-58477-489-1. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 1 November 2020.
  115. ↑ Reading Eagle 26 Jul 1970
  116. ↑ Cuneiform Tablets in the British Museum (PDF). British Museum. 1905. pp. Plates 44 and 45. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 January 2021. Retrieved 14 March 2020.
  117. ↑ Budge, E. A. Wallis (Ernest Alfred Wallis); King, L. W. (Leonard William) (1908). A guide to the Babylonian and Assyrian antiquities. London: Printed by the order of the Trustees. p. 147.
  118. ↑ For full transcription: "CDLI-Archival View". cdli.ucla.edu. Archived from the original on 4 November 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  119. 1 2 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 128.
  120. 1 2 3 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 127.
  121. 1 2 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 126.
  122. 1 2 Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 126–127.
  123. 1 2 3 Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 129.
  124. 1 2 Van De Mieroop 2005, pp. 129–130.
  125. ↑ Schneider, Tammi J. (2011), An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, pp. 58–59, ISBN 978-0-8028-2959-7, archived from the original on 12 November 2021, retrieved 1 November 2020
  126. ↑ Roux 1992, pp. 243–246.
  127. 1 2 DeBlois 1997, p. 19.
  128. ↑ Van De Mieroop 2005, p. 130.
  129. ↑ Frazer, Mary; Adalı, Selim Ferruh (25 November 2021). ""The just judgements that Ḫammu-rāpi, a former king, rendered": A New Royal Inscription in the Istanbul Archaeological Museums". Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie. 111 (2): 231–262. doi:10.1515/za-2021-2004. ISSN 0084-5299. S2CID 244530410. Archived from the original on 20 March 2023. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
  130. 1 2 Ziolkowski 2012, p. 25.
  131. 1 2 Ziolkowski 2012, pp. 23–25.
  132. ↑ Rogers, Robert W.; Kohler, Kaufmann; Jastrow, Marcus. "Amraphel". The Jewish Encyclopedia. Archived from the original on 22 November 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2012.
  133. ↑ "Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 14 - New International Version". Archived from the original on 20 November 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2012.
  134. ↑ North, Robert (1993). "Abraham". In Metzger, Bruce M.; Coogan, Michael D. (eds.). The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-19-504645-8.
  135. 1 2 Granerød, Gard (26 March 2010). Abraham and Melchizedek: Scribal Activity of Second Temple Times in Genesis 14 and Psalm 110. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter. p. 120. ISBN 978-3-11-022346-0.
  136. 1 2 Douglas, J. D.; Tenney, Merrill C. (2011). Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan. p. 1323. ISBN 978-0-310-22983-4.
  137. 1 2 3 Barton 1916, p. 406.
  138. 1 2 Unger, M.F.: Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1954, pp. 156–157
  139. 1 2 Free, J.P.: Archaeology and Biblical History. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1950, 1969, p. 121
  140. ↑ Wright, David P. (2009). Inventing God's Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. pp. 3 and passim. ISBN 978-0-19-530475-6.
  141. ↑ Horowitz, Wayne; Oshima, Takayoshi; Vukosavović, Filip (2012). "Hazor 18: Fragments of a Cuneiform Law Collection from Hazor". Israel Exploration Journal. 62 (2): 158–176. ISSN 0021-2059. JSTOR 43855622.
  142. ↑ "Hammurabi". Architect of the Capitol. Archived from the original on 22 November 2021. Retrieved 19 May 2008.
  143. ↑ "Courtroom Friezes" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 June 2010. Retrieved 19 May 2008.
  144. ↑ Biskupic, Joan (11 March 1998). "Lawgivers: From Two Friezes, Great Figures of Legal History Gaze Upon the Supreme Court Bench". WP Company LLC. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 18 August 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2017.

Further reading

  • Frayne, Douglas (1990). The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Early Periods, vol. 4: Old Babylonian Period (2003–1595 BC). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Horsnell, Malcolm J. A. (1999). The Year Names of the First Dynasty of Babylon, vol. 2: The Year-Names reconstructed and Critically Annotated in Light of their Exemplars. Hamilton: McMaster University Press.
  • Beaulieu, Paul-Alain (2018). A History of Babylon, 2200 BC - AD 75. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Boivin, Odette (2020). "The Kingdom of Babylon and the Kingdom of the Sealand". In Karen Radner, Nadine Moeller and Daniel T. Potts (ed.). The Oxford History of the Ancient Near East, Volume 2: From the End of the Third Millennium BC to the Fall of Babylon. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 566–655.
  • Charpin, Dominique (2003). Hammu-rabi de Babylone (in French). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  • Charpin, Dominique (2004). "Histoire politique du Proche-Orient amorrite (2002-1595)". Mesopotamien: die altbabylonische Zeit (PDF) (in French). Freiburg and Göttingen: Academic Press Fribourg and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. pp. 25–480.
  • Charpin, Dominique (2012). Hammurabi of Babylon. London: I.B. Tauris. (translation of Charpin (2003))
  • Sasson, Jack M. (2015). From the Mari Archives: An Anthology of Old Babylonian Letters. University Park, USA: Penn State University Press.
  • Michalowski, Piotr; Streck, Michael P. (2017). "Hammurapi". Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie. Vol. 15. pp. 380–390.
  • Radner, Karen (2020). A Short History of Babylon. Londres and New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hammurabi&oldid=1378432123"