Primary Source Document Analysis: The Code of Hammurabi

Primary Source Document Analysis: The Code of Hammurabi
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation
Primary Source Document Analysis: The Code of Hammurabi
Introduction
The Code of Hammurabi is a Babylonian Code of Law which is well-preserved. It is dated around 1754 BC and shows the life of society members in ancient Mesopotamia. It is one of the oldest documented codes of law on the ancient societies. The code was enacted by Hammurabi, who was the 6th king of Babylon. The code contains 282 laws, which can be used to tell the economic life of the society during that time (Strommenger, 2020). The laws also outline the punishments for social offenders, based on whether a slave or free, gender and social status, and whether male or female. The document is evidence of the society’s progression from a simple society to a more complex one, and its growth from foraging to an agrarian society, with agriculture as its main economic activity.
Evidence of the “Agricultural Revolution” from the Document
The document shows that as per the new code of laws, it was mandatory for everyone to put their land into agricultural use. For instance, Code 44 required that anyone who was in possession of arable land but failed to utilize it to give to someone else to till for four years and then get it back. Codes 33-44 also outline the new set of laws that the population had to adhere to. This shows that the population slowly transformed from foraging to an agrarian society. Foraging involves farming only a piece of land that is enough for the user (Robert, 1904). However, the agrarian approach advocated in the code of laws shows that everyone was supposed to put their land into total use. The laws also required dams to be kept well to ensure the farmers had water for their crops. The agrarian farming was characterized by new modes of farming.
It is also easy to note from the emphasis of the code of laws on the population focusing on agriculture that the economy of the society was based on producing and maintaining farmland and crops. The laws outline how this is to be achieved. For instance, code 63 encouraged the society members to take any waste land transform it into arable farms and then return to the owner and get paid for their services. This ensured that there was minimal waste land in the area. Similarly, code 65 discouraged any form of laziness or failure to work in the farms. If one failed to tend their land their crops fell off, he/she would be required to compensate the neighbors (Robert, 1904). This is because failure to attend to one’s farm could result in crop disease and the same could spread to neighbors. This also ensured that neighbors worked in union to ensure that crop production was increased. Much of the society’s production was in agriculture, and this further justifies how the society moved from foraging to an agrarian one. According to the emphasis of code of laws on tilling farm lands and agriculture, it is evident that cultivation was the primary source of wealth; those who had vast land farms could lease out. There were flexible terms of paying for rented land. Code 48 provided that one was not required to pay any rent if they rented land and farmed but there was no harvest. However, there was supposed to be evidence that they put in effort and that the lack of harvest was due to such natural causes as lack of water hence the grain failing to grow. The society acknowledges other means of work and livelihood such as trading (slave trade) and holding leadership positions, but the code of laws clearly stresses the importance of farming and agriculture. Therefore, the socio-economic organization of the society as shown by its code of laws shows the transition from foraging to an agrarian society.
Evidence of the historical shift from small “simple” societies to larger more “complex” societies from the Document
The document is evidence of the historical shift from a small society to a larger and more complex society. The first justification is that the society formulated a code of laws that was to guide relations among people and ensure they walked on the same path. Initially, small and traditional societies did not have any form of a written code to lead the people. The written code is evidence of the growing nature of the society and the need to document such laws. The laws are also characteristic of complex societies because they focus on the wellbeing of the oppressed in the society (Adamo & Al-Ansari, 2020). For instance, the first two codes warned against making false accusations and threats, as well as the punishment for the same; death. This promoted peace and prevented cases of oppression. Such scenarios were unheard of in the small societies since there was no one to advocate the rights of the oppressed, and neither was there any documented code that guided people’s actions and behavior. Further, the documentation outlined the expected code of conduct for leaders and masters over their slaves, which is typical of complex societies. For instance, Code 7 banned theft of slaves and thus prevented their potential misuse by their new masters. Code 15 was against taking slaves outside the gates of the society since this could expose them to further enslaving, and doing so was punishable by death. On the other hand, Code 205 warned slaves against harming any freed man. Such codes outline how the society had moved up to protect the slaves and ensure that they lived in harmony with the rest.
The documentation of the code of laws is also evidence that the society had settled down and become sedentary, hence the need for the laws. The manner in which good relations, agriculture, and effective leadership have been emphasized in the code shows that the society had forgotten its nomadic ways and already adapted new techniques that allowed them to increase their agricultural output (Surdam, 2020). For instance, they were required to build trenches to prevent water from flowing into their neighbor’s land (Code 55 and 56). The use of ploughs and metallic farming tools was also adopted and encouraged to promote agricultural output (Code 241-258). At first, the society was using human power for agricultural purposes but later domesticated oxen and utilized their power, such as in pulling yoke and ploughs. Codes 241-258 also outline laws that governed borrowing ox and using them for farm purposes. This is also another feature of First Civilization in this society. Further, the importance attached to rivers and sources of water such as dams (Codes 53, 260, and 2) shows the growing complexity of the society; such dams and rivers were so important because they were a source of water for domestic use and irrigation purposes. River Euphrates also had a cultural meaning and importance in the society, as show in Code 2.
The documentation is also evidence of the growing complexity of the society because the measures outlined promoted increased food supply, hence leading to population increase. The population increase made it hard for the population to continue with its nomadic lifestyle and hence adopt a sedentary one. As the population expanded, the society also increased its settlements and boundaries, but adhering to the set Code of Laws (Topor, 2020). The expansion of the society created larger villages which supported the specialization of resources. Such specialization contributed to some of the society members having more of certain necessities like food, especially those who did not till their land or were lazy, which was against the Code of Laws (44 and 53). Those who had enough supplies of the needed commodities gave them more power over the rest, creating a wealthier class in the society. This also justified the rise of masters versus slaves in the society....