English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why is the "Code of Hammurabi" so harsh?

historical explanation, please

2007-08-28 14:50:13 · 5 answers · asked by anonymous 3 in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

Because ancient civilizations had a different style of law and justice. It was more brutal, but also more fair, where the judicial system today in the United States is deplorable due to the relative ease of guilty parties to get off without punishment.

Besides which, the Babylonians were a very harsh-minded people; they had the largest empire of their time, a hero-god who created the universe by destroying a primordial monster, and kings who often got the throne by murdering their predecessors.

2007-08-28 15:02:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Because in olden tymes life was a lot harsher. A lot.

People at that time lived precarious existences. People were a whole lot more untamed. People carried weapons, because the threat of violence and death from enemies or thieves or animals was very real.

Also, because life was so harsh and people less refined, their scale of harshness was much different than our modern one in present industrialized, liberal, democratic, Western countries. People really had few rights. It was the rule of the strong. The Code is actually more lenient than what the people were used to, if you can believe that.

2007-08-28 21:54:22 · answer #2 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 0 0

Ancient people had no massive prisons and no money to support them. Prisons were where people were held temporarily- it cost too much in money and manpower to have them permanently- so the punishment had to be inexpensive and immediate. That's why instead of a prison sentence, you paid a fine or lost a body part or were executed or sold into slavery, etc..

It was much the same in the US before state's began collecting income taxes and building prisons. Most towns had stocks and whipping posts in the square, gallows could be erected quickly to hang those sentenced to death, and upon occasion a free person could even be sentenced to involuntary servitude (for a set period of time), and it was for the same reason: it punished criminals but didn't cost much. (Today it costs more money to keep a man in prison for 4 years than it would cost to send him to Harvard, and there are more than 7 million people currently in prison or on parole or probation or awaiting trial, so do the math and you'll see how much it costs to be "merciful".)

2007-08-28 22:16:19 · answer #3 · answered by Jonathan D 5 · 0 0

The real answer to your question is this: Morality, just like anything else in the world, underwent a certain evolution: From cruelty to kindness, from injustice to justice, from discrimination to tolerance, etc. The human society moves more and more towards a compassionate, kind society. The earlier societies are, as a rule, more cruel and unjust than modern societies.

2007-08-28 23:44:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Harsh? If one person caused another's death, his life was forfeit. In other words, people had to be responsible for their actions, unlike nowadays when the weak, the oppressed and the poor bear the burdens.

2007-08-28 21:57:37 · answer #5 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers