Clinch Valley news. [volume] (Jeffersonville, Va.) 18??-2019, 1917-11-30
THE CODE OF HAMMURABI AND
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
rom Buchanan School Herald
margaret T. Niche

Nutai SdicL niCnlG.
The code of Hammurabi goes back
to period long antedating the laws
OF Moses. Hammurabi lived and flour
ished about $3.50 B. C. He was a con-
temporary of Abraham and ruled Ur
Of the Chaldes when Abraham left for
Canaan.
Some writer's have said that col
lection of laws as perfect as those of
Moses could not have been written
as early in the worlds history as the
middle of the second millennium b. C.
but the code Of Hammurabi was writ
ten almost 1000 years before the time
OF Moses. The code of Hammurabi
is purely secular document from
polytheistic people. but it shows that
the Babylonian empire at the time of
Hammurabi had reached a higher de-
gree of civilization.
The more liberal critics saw the
Hebrews borrowed their religious idea
and laws wholesale from the Babylo-
mans, but there is no proof that the
Pentateuch owes any such debt to
Babylon. Any of the laws in both are
the common property Of mankind.
such as would have suggested them
selves to any civilized people.
The Hammurab code, though writ
ten IN Babylonian script and language
was discovered in Susa, Persia. 1t was
probably captured BY the Elamites in
one of their many invasions of Bah
ylon and placed in their capital as
trophy of war. The discovery was
made by M. de Morgan, well known
Tor discoveries among the ruins of
Egypt. The code is written on three
fragments of a rude stone block
which NJ. de Morgan discovered in
December, 1901 and January, 1902.
Besides the thirty-fvc laws which
had been numbered but erased, there
are two hundred forty seven distinct
laws still to be seen. The code has
been translated into French, German,
English and Italian.
Prof. R. F. Harper, of the Univer-
sity of Chicago, has produced an elc-
| Soiie anu complete VOlumo.
The text of the Hammurabi code is
divided into three parts, the prologue,
the code itself and the epilogue. The
prologue and epilogue contain much
of what seems like braggadocio to
modern peoples.
| In comparing the two sets of laws
the first thing that attracts attention
is the fact that he Hammurabi code
proceeds from the great monarch. the
earthly king of Babylon, while the
Mosaic code proceeds directly from
the hand and mouth of God. HAM
murabl's laws are purely secular, re-
iatlng to economical, social and NOR
al affairs; the laws of Moses are re-
ligious, relating to the relationship
between God and man, and between
man and man. The Babylonians were
poiytheists and their laws had no
| spiritual or religious background.
Therefore we find no parallel in Ham
murabi's code for our first command
ment, "Thou shalt have 10 other Gods
before me-" Nor is there any law re-
lating to the worship of idols, for the
same reason.
Likewise, we find no parallel for
outlaw of the Sabbath, nor for talk
ing the name of God in vain. The
Babylonians had no supreme God and
so they had no need for such laws.
There is indication in the Hammu-
rabi code that parents were to be hon
ored and respected but there is no
exact parallel for our fifth command
| ment.
Both codes forbid killing. In Bah
yloniar the lex taliones" seems to
have prevailed-an eye for an eye, a
tooth for tooth, etc. In some cases.
there was room for restitution and
then fines could be paid.
The laws against adultery are very
much alike in the two codes. The laws
of theft are much harsher in the Bah
ylonian code, due to the more devel-
oped commercial and business system
in Babylonia than in Israel.
Both codes condemn to death for
false witness. The Mosaic code has
no exact parallel for the punishment
for unfair decisions of judges. Ham
murabi makes no mention of covet-
BUSINESS.
On the whole see no striking re-
semblace between the two codes, moth
ing to justify the statement that Mos
es borrowed from Hammurabi.