Primarily, fertile women were compelled to marry for the continuation of society. As such, marriages were rife with corruption and Hammurabi sought the need to use the Code to address such corruption. For instance, Law 163 would protect the husband’s purchase price (dowry) if her wife did not bear any sons. Just as well, daughters were most likely victimized to rape and incest as Law 157 exiles the father if he commits incest with her daughter. Overall, Hammurabi’s laws reinforced the principle that the husband is the dominant figure in a household, but still aimed at providing protection for those he would “rule,” including his wife and children; the most heinous of actions, such as disowning a son had to be proven in a court of law as necessary and proper (however it need not take much except perhaps bad behavior or even a relatively minor infraction). Albeit, these justifications and punishments may have been considered barbaric and morally reprehensible today, Hammurabi’s rationale for these punishments is to primarily prevent repeat offenses and he resorted to the archaic principle of “eye for an eye” in regards to proper consequences for violating the Code. Clearly, this Old Testament, “eye for an eye” mentality would not be able to succeed through many generations, at least in state institutions and government. …show more content…
Arguably, this is Hammurabi’s own revolution with an aspect to writing. By setting the precedent that laws should be publicly available and easily accessible for anyone, compliance and enforcement rates would increase and a more prosperous society such as Babylonia’s would occur. Although ultimately the kingdom was not immune to the principle of the rise and fall of every empire, his laws were utilized by various other city states as they realized that this precedent was critical to keep citizens in check and to some degree, quell