Hammurabi Social Class

I picked the “social class” as a "freeman," I observed there to be many laws related and put in place to ensure them protection/rights. The codes demonstrate to us that society was separated into three classes (similar to today): free men, dependant men and slaves (Amelu, Muskenu, and Ardu). The Code of Hammurabi has laws for men and women. A large portion of these laws are more like punishments to women. The codes define freemen as humans, a life of a freeman ought to be paid with another life, yet the others could be paid with silver or gold. Hammurabi gives a major importance to the property of the free men. There are about 65 codes based on property, with the exception of farms, cattle's, slaves, safe keeping issues exists in the codes, …show more content…
In this way, as we can see the arbiter of a family is the man. Getting separated is an easier fact for man; they generally pay some amount of cash and give back woman's share to the father of the woman. In addition, incest relations of the wife or cheating on husband would be punished with death or with outcast of the wife. The question is, was that way of protecting fair? All penalties under the code of Hammurabi were harsh, some involving loss of hand or eye for example a slave who struck a freeman. To be a freeman gave a greater number of rights than other individuals in the society, there was not equality among all social classes. There were the freeman or wealthy individuals, the semi-freeman who could become slaves at any time, and the slaves who were obviously the lowest class. According to the text of the code, the consequences of the laws could be estimated, crime should be decreased, the order should be gets tougher, and people should live in fear and more privately. I think the code was in context for the time. For us today it appears to be exceptionally harsh, however the code taught discipline and gave laws instead of simply allowing