Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 9.djvu/767

 THE LA WS OF HAMMURABI 741

and concludes with sixteen complicated curses upon him who dares to ignore, obliterate, or modify the laws of the "king of righteousness whom Shamash has endowed with justice." 1 Aside from the allusions of prologue and epilogue to the gods, and the mention of oaths and the privileges of devotees in the code itself, the subject of religion is not treated. The code is a body of civil law without any ritualistic element.

The translation of an ancient legal code back into the social organization out of which it originally grew is at best a specula- tive enterprise. Pitfalls abound on every hand. The interpreta- tion of the text is often uncertain ; technical terms especially are elusive ; many of the regulations may never have been actually enforced; a wide range of customary law may have been assumed, and hence omitted altogether. Fortunately, in this case materials exist from which a fairly satisfactory outline sketch of civilization in ancient Babylon may be drawn. Con- stantly accumulating finds contribute to the filling in and shading of this picture. The code of Hammurabi gives sharpness of definition to many features which otherwise would be vague. These are, however, the economic, civil, and domestic relations only. Religion, art, literature, and science are not touched by the recently discovered laws.

Babylonia under Hammurabi was a group of city-provinces in process of unification through the influence of a nationalized religion, a powerful, centralized government, a closely interde- pendent commerce, and a well-recognized legal system which protected property rights and stimulated agriculture and indus- try. The state was personified in the priest-king, in whom were joined personal prestige and divine authority. Crown lands were held under a feudal tenure by a class of priests, devotees, nobles, military and civil officials, in whose interest the laws were in certain respects carefully framed. To presumably the same social status belonged a class of landowners, bankers, and merchants. Next in the social scale came the tradesmen and artisans, followed by the tenant farmers who held their lands under the metayer system. In the next stratum were the free

1 HARPER, op. cit., pp. 99-109.