Hammurabi (Civ6)/Civilopedia

The name of Babylon lives on, despite being at its height over three thousand years ago, synonymous with luxury and power. And of the kings of Babylon, Hammurabi’s name also remains associated with harsh justice and rational rule.
Hammurabi was the first ruler of the Amorite dynasty of Babylon. He succeeded his father Sin-Muballit when he was still relatively young. His father built the foundation of the kingdom during his rule but wasn’t much of a conqueror, after a failed military campaign against the neighboring city of Larsa. This is possibly what pressured him into leaving the throne early to his son Hammurabi – it would have been an arrangement that made everyone happy: Larsa and their king, Rim Sin I, could rest easier with the seemingly internally-focused boy on the throne.
Hammurabi began his reign by continuing his father’s work on improving the internal structures of the kingdom. This included a code of laws that he wrote (or, rather, chiseled) in 1754 BC, which became known as the Code of Hammurabi.
The Code of Hammurabi was carved onto a giant, four-ton slab of diorite in cuneiform. The laws revolved around Lex Talionis, or retributive justice – the phrase “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is a quotation from the Code. The idea here was that specific crimes would have specific punishments in order to ensure that there was no need for interpretation after the accused was sentenced. Many of the punishments were brutal, which was enough to deter a lot of crimes. Not all of the tests to decide guilt would hold up by today’s standards (a swimming test, for instance, to check whether a woman was unfaithful to her husband).
In Babylon, Hammurabi built up the city walls and developed a system of irrigation based around canals and aqueducts. He also began the building of magnificent temples for their gods. This made him popular with the people and raised their sense of civic duty, which was exactly what he needed. Because, contra what those people of Larsa thought, Hammurabi was indeed going to conquer southern Mesopotamia.
It would have been easy to fall into the trap of attacking Larsa to get revenge for his father’s defeat. A lesser king would have. Instead, he allied himself with Larsa when a group called the Elamites invaded central Mesopotamia (these are the same Elamites who built the city of Anshan). With their help, he quickly and easily defeated the Elamites, but as soon as that alliance served its purpose, Hammurabi turned the tables. He went to the city-states of Nippur and Lagash, making alliances with them so he could take Uruk and Isin—Larsan cities. He then turned on his allies and took Nippur and Lagash. Despite this constant dance of alliance and betrayal, he continued to find willing allies until the entirety of southern Mesopotamia was under his control.
Hammurabi’s conquest didn’t end with the conquering of Larsa. His eyes turned to the north, where king Zimri-Lim held the Amorite Kingdom of Mari. Mari was rich, and they controlled the water. Rather than continuing to negotiate with the city for the use of the Euphrates River, Hammurabi challenged Mari. He razed the city instead of conquering it, potentially to send a message to all of Mesopotamia: he was the one to set the terms for negotiation. Hammurabi continued north from there to Eshnunna and by 1755 BC, he ruled all of Mesopotamia.
He wasn’t a cruel king, regardless of what his invasions might otherwise say. He was called bani matim, or the builder of the land. He cared for his people even when he was away expanding his lands. He sent letters to his administrators with orders for the maintenance and decoration of the city. Hammurabi’s code was innovative in not only its strictness, but in its capacity for mercy – criminals were presumed innocent, for starters.
Like his father, Hammurabi trusted his son, Samsu-Iluna with the tasks of a king prior to his full ascension, so Hammurabi wasn’t concerned when age and illness caught up to him. However, following Hammurabi’s death in 1750 BC, Samsu-Iluna proved unable to hold back the invasions that followed. Barely a year after his death, his kingdom started to fall. Whether it was because his successors lacked the charisma, intelligence, or humble wisdom, or simply because alliances weren’t maintained, the kingdom was never as vast or secure as it was under Hammurabi’s reign.