The so-called Mesopotamian Law Codes: what is in a name?

The importance of designating a name for
something and thereby according a definite meaning to it, is evident from the discovery of a black diorite stelae in 1902, and the study of this artifact by many scholars of today. This monumental artifact was assigned to a great king of ancient Mesopotamia: King Hammurabi of Babylon who ruled from 1792 B.C. for forty-three years.

It is a beautiful inlaid presentation of a king/man receiving something from a god/man, with, below, fifty-one columns of carefully inscribed cuneiform script, containing three parts: a prologue, body of “cases”, and an epilogue.

Immediately after its discovery in 1902, Vincent Scheil translated it and after careful consideration named it the Codex of Hammurabi.

The monumental appearance of this artifact led scholars to believe that it had a widespread and long impact, as well as communicating a very strong message, in the Ancient Near East. Some scholars impose the practical and theoretical implementation of today’s law on this artifact and follow Scheil’s example by ascribing a special meaning to it and naming it a law code.

From the nineteenth century onward other Mesopotamian cuneiform collections were, in respect to time and place, sporadically discovered and most scholars continue with the idea established by Scheil by naming these law codes.

Recently a growing number of scholars have argued that the so-called Mesopotamian “law codes” or cuneiform collections consist of different meanings extended over long time-periods and exhibit social, political, economic and ethnic differences (Roth 1995:1; see discussion in Malul 1990:1-6, 22-36 and Finkelstein 1981).

In determining whether the Mesopotamian cuneiform collections are an authentic source for Mesopotamian law traditions, scholars have developed different theories each of which has different variations (see discussion in Roth 1997:7-14; 1995). In the light of the existing theories the generic naming of the cuneiform collections of Mesopotamia as “codes” or “law codes” encompasses a certain meaning, which may obscure and confuse the debate with regards to their true meaning and correct application in the study of ancient Mesopotamian law traditions.

(Extract from: Susandra Claassens Van Wyk (2010) “The so-called ‘Mesopotamian Law Codes': what is in a name?” Journal for Semitics, 19/2 481-498).

Bibliography

Finkelstein J J 1981. The ox that gored, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
71/2:1-89.
Malul, M 1988. Studies in Mesopotamian legal symbolism. Neukirchener Verlag Neukirchen-Vluyn:Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer.
Roth M T 1995. Mesopotamian legal traditions and the laws of Hammurabi, Chicago
Kent Law Review 71:13-39.
Roth M T 1997. Law collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. SBL.