Download File - Kiersten Archibald

Archibald 1
Kiersten Archibald
Sister Christensen
Honors Writing & Rhetoric
5, December 2013
Women and the Code of Hammurabi
They say that history is a man’s tale. This is actually very nearly true. From around the
year 2000 B.C. to the late 20th century A.D., history was written primarily by men, about men,
and taught to men (Matthew). There has been a common misconception that women have always
been restricted to child rearing, so consequently they have always been socially inferior to men.
The first civilization to appear, meaning the first group of people with a clear language, religion,
form of writing, political structure, economy, art, and a monetary system was Sumer, located in
the land of Mesopotamia at around 3500 B.C. Contrary to popular belief, data shows that early
Sumerian women held considerable power and a valuable societal role. Unfortunately, the high
social and political status of early Sumerian women “gradually declined with the emergence of a
militaristic, male dominated, politically centralized, class society,” (Rohrlich, 80). Between
3500 B.C. and 1750 B.C., Mesopotamian civilization steadily advanced as they morphed into a
more advanced society. Many city-states emerged, rose to power, and were conquered by
surrounding peoples. It was a time of chaos. Around 1750 B.C. a powerful ruler named
Hammurabi emerged and united much of the Mesopotamian city-states, beginning the
Babylonian era. In order to create more stability, Hammurabi wrote the first laws called the
“Code of Hammurabi.” By the rise of the Babylonian era around 1750 B.C., women’s rights and
status were heavily restricted. While many factors brought about the degradation of women’s
Archibald 2
rights between the Sumerian and Babylonian eras, the Code of Hammurabi had the biggest
impact in legally sanctioning women’s oppression.
Ancient Mesopotamia consisted of four major civilizations: Sumer, Amorites/Babylonia,
Assyria, and Chaldea/Neo-Babylonia. There was a major lack of continuity between the
civilizations. The Code of Hammurabi was not comprised until the beginning of the Babylonian
era around 1970 B.C. However, in order to understand the impact of the Hammurabi legislation
on women’s lives, it is important to review the development of Babylonia from Sumeria and the
roles women possessed at that time.
Sumeria emerged as the first civilization in an area known as the Fertile Crescent. Many
nomadic groups and Neolithic farmers had filtered into the Fertile Crescent between the Tigris
and Euphrates rivers. As various social and environmental conflicts arose, the ancient peoples
survived due to cooperative effort (Rohrlich, 89). Over centuries, small, simple villages
converged to form large urban centers. Complex trade systems, religions, governments,
economies, class systems, and cultures appeared. At the center of this growing civilization were
women.
The principal diety was a goddess (Mellaart, 92). Rohrlich claims that there were more
goddesses, “in the proportion of sixty to forty in favor of goddesses,” (Rohrlich, 46). Females
were the only known creators of life—the male role in procreation had not yet been discovered—
so, logically the creators of mankind, the deities were also females. The original goddess was
Nammu, who gave birth to heaven and earth. Then came An, the sky goddess, who gave birth to
additional goddesses and gods. Nunhursaga was the goddess of the rocky ground and held the
power of birth. She had close relations with Enki, the primary god and chief of the heaven. In the
myth of Enki and Ninhursaga, Enki became very ill. Ninhursaga healed him by placing him in
Archibald 3
her vagina and giving birth to eight healing female deities (Jacobsen, 113). The leading goddess
is Ishtar. She was the “Goddess of the communal storehouse…which [could] take care of all
lands,” (Jacobsen, 39). She symbolized the authority of women as producers and distributors of
staple food and clothing. She controlled the weather, elements, tears and rejoicing, and justice.
Jacobsen says, “She seems to have a hand in almost everything,” (Jacobsen, 141).
Due to the great number of female deities, the ens—religious temple leaders—were
primarily women. According to the Drehem Archives, “Even as late as the Ur III period, women
were performing extremely important religious…functions, for which they were trained in a
wide variety of skills,” (Rohrlich, 60). These religious women acquired great wealth and
independence. The Sal-Me priestesses especially held immense power. In fact, “Their children
did not have relations with their fathers and practiced matrilineal descent,” (Rohrlich, 63).
Astonishingly, early Sumerian women were also the primary rulers and outranked their
male counterparts. Rohrlich says, “Matriarchy seems to have left something more than a trace in
the early Sumerian city-states,” (Rohrlich, 77 ). The tombs of strong female figures such as NinBanda and Nin-Shubad, which were buried in the Royal Cemetery of Ur around 2900 BC, were
more lavishly and expensively furnished than any surrounding male’s tomb. Figures such as KuBau who founded the Third Dynasty of Kish around 2500 BC, became legendary, mythical
figures (Wooley, 66). The last true queen of Sumer was Barahamtarra who ruled jointly with her
husband, the high priest Lugalanda around 2,450 B.C. She was extremely beloved by her people
and was deified after her passing.
Women were crucial to sustaining a thriving economy. Archaeologists have found many
female figurines in and around grain bins, pointing “to their central role in agriculture”
(Rohrlich, 78). The women of early Sumer were also critical to the efficient long-distance trade
Archibald 4
system with Crete, Northern Africa, and many parts of the world. Women were the primary
producers of Sumer’s goods. They “wove the earliest textiles so far found; the wall paintings
show strikingly patterned garments and rugs, dyed with a full range of pigments” (Mellert, 231).
They also participated in and led large trading parties and oversaw the exchanging of goods.
In Sumer, both males and females were trained in a wide variety of skills which allowed
them to contribute to society in many occupations. Around 2095-2048 BC, near the city of
Nippur, the Drehem “served as a center for the reception and redistribution of all kinds of game
animals, fowl, and cattle, which were collected as taxes and booty,”(Rohrlich, 87) and was run
solely by females. The high-ranking women called lukur lugals, managed the entire Drehem and
hired women to conduct the complicated transactions such as distributing the goods to the royal
families, temples, soldiers, and officials. They also collected the goods and animals to bring to
the Drehem, (Kang, 263).
Girls got married in their teen years once they hit puberty. Males usually got married in
their mid-twenties. Typically, in a conventional marriage, the future husband would offer the
father of the bride a bride-price, in which the father would either accept or refuse. If he accepted
it, the father would give his daughter a dowry of property which would become her sole
possessions. She held full rights to the dowry and could do what she wished with it (Rohrlich,
78).
Both husband and wife shared equal rights when it came to exercising authority over their
children. “An upper-class wife could conduct her own business affairs, and could keep personal
slaves or sell them,” (Rohrlich, 90). In early Sumerian society, marriage was typically
monogamous. In the later stages of Sumeria however, a woman was respected for the number of
children she had. If she gave birth to no children, she could be divorced. If she did not want to
Archibald 5
give birth continuously, her husband then possessed right to leave her, but was required to
provide financial support for her and her children. Women were normally required to be under
the constant care of men, although “Widows in 2500 B.C. era take over the position of the father
and manage the household until sons are old enough to take over,” (Stol, 132).
Sumerian city-states gradually grew and prospered. However, as society became more
specialized and stratified, women were increasingly restricted in the roles they performed. With
increased warfare between city-states, Sumer needed more soldiers. Women were required to
produce offspring to provide more bodies and raise future contributing members of society. The
increased warfare also led to the rise of kings, who replaced the previous city-state rulers. These
kings united large land masses and people. Eventually, a new beauocracy and army were created
under the first Sumerian king, King Lugalzaggis of Umma in 2,375 B.C. Rohrlich summarizes
this well saying, “As the class society became increasingly competitive over the acquisition of
commodities, primarily luxury goods for the elites, and for control over the trade routes, warfare
became endemic, and eventually led to the centralization of political power in the hands of a
male ruling class,” (Rohrlich, 99).
Although society became increasingly male-dominated, women were not legally restricted
to household duties. Though their position was in decline, it “yet remained relatively high in that
rights to inherit land and to exercise certain professions were still retained,” (Adams, 87). The
temple women retained most of their powers. “The continuance of the priestess role in
patriarchal Sumer in the face of the deterioration of other women’s roles can be attributed in part
to the continuing power of the goddess the women served,” (Boulding, 185).
Due to a profusion of events, by the beginning of the second millennium B.C., Sumerian
power had declined to such an extent that they could no longer protect themselves from foreign
Archibald 6
invasion. The Amorites from the west quickly conquered much of the once powerful kingdom.
They ruled for a little over a century until Hammurabi of Babylon raged battle against the
Ammorties and eventually, took back Sumerian lands. He founded the Babylonian Empire in
1792 B.C., and unified the people under a single language and religion.
Arguably Hammurabi’s biggest contribution was the Code of Hammurabi. Hammurabi’s
code was written on several eight-foot stone tablets for all to see. The Code of Hammurabi was
the world’s first set of solid, enforceable laws to which every civilian was subject and every
crime bore a punishment. It was comprised of a prologue and 282 laws addressing social, moral,
and economic issues of the day. In the prologue, he wrote that the purpose was to “destroy the
wicked…so that the strong should not harm the weak…to further the well-being of mankind,”
(King). He claimed that his code would bring justice and prosperity to his people.
However, women had previously possessed general legal independence. With the Code of
Hammurabi, the social stigmas formerly associated with Sumerian women were transformed into
enforceable laws. Women were heavily restricted in family life, marriage, socially, and
religiously. Their position shrunk until they were simply considered a male-owned piece of
property. They were hardly prosperous nor dealt with justly.
Hammurabi’s Code gave instruction on family-function. A father had complete control
over the family, especially the females. In fact, “One of the last resorts for a man in debt was to
give his wife, daughters and slave girls to his creditor as pledges, who had to work there,” (Stol,
136). Their fathers owned and controlled them until they were either married, sold, or became a
temple woman.
The Code of Hammurabi outlined the procedure for a proper marriage. A woman was
required to be married off by a man whether it be a father, friend, or a brother. In practice,
Archibald 7
Babylonian marriages were little more than a sale. The words used for marriage (emūtum,
hatanūtum) “indicate that a man, the groom (hatanum), enters into a family relationship with a
male person in the other family (emum). The future wife is the passive object of this
transaction,” (Stol, 125). The more wealthy the woman, the more desirable she became.
The groom brought the father a bride-price (tirhâtum). The tirhâtum was dependant on the
social class and virtue of the prospective bride. There are instances when tirhâtum means no
more than, ‘price for a woman.’ (Prostgate, 96). The value of a woman was equivalent to the
extent of her virginity. In southern Mesopotamia near the Euphrates river, the palace of Zimrilim
contains over 25,000 cuneiform tablets were inscribed with economic, legal and diplomatic texts.
They are still preserved today and provide important information about ancient Mesopotamian
happenings. The Mari archives contain a letter from a bride confessing her virtue to her husband.
She wrote, referring to another man, “He kissed my lips, he touched my vagina, but his penis did
not enter my vagina,” (Stol, 128), meaning that her virtue had dwindled while her virginity
remained untouched. Often, in order to display the worth of the potential wife, they would wear
large silver rings on their arms and feet (Prostgate, 97). It is hypothesized that the rings
represented the paid price for the bride.
Again, in order to illustrate the virtue of the bride and power of the groom, the groom
would offered a gift (nudunnum) to the bride. The father would then settle upon her a dowry
(šeriktum). This exchanging of goods finalized the engagement, or rather the sale (Luckenbill).
After the wedding, the wife retained the title of ‘bride’ until the birth of her first child.
Since the purpose of a wife was to present her husband with children, a woman was hardly
considered above the status of slave until her first child. M. Stol says, “A woman who has borne
her husband and his family a child, has become a respected person,” (Stol, 129). Due to this fact,
Archibald 8
a pregnant Babylonian woman was in danger of being hit by random people, jealous or wishing
to prevent the mother from obtaining the title of wife, which resulted in an abortion. Often
women were kept hidden once they conceived. If she did not conceive, a man could divorce her,
remarry, or hire a woman to give birth to his children. Women were now restrained to
monogamy. In Hammurabi’s code, it says, “The women of former days used to take two
husbands (but) the women of today (if they attempt this) are stoned with stones (upon which is
inscribed their evil) intent,” (Kramer, 332). Babylonian men were most fearful of their woman
conceiving an illegitimate child. To prevent this, the Code of Hammurabi places strict
restrictions and punishments upon women. Clause 132 of the Code of Hammurabi states, “If the
"finger is pointed" at a man's wife about another man, but she is not caught sleeping with the
other man, she shall jump into the river for her husband” (King). If she drowned, she was
deemed guilty; if she swam, she was clearly innocent and may return home. Additionally, clause
129 of the Code of Hammurabi stated that a “wife caught in the act of adultery was to be tied to
her lover and thrown into the water and drowned. A husband may save his wife but then he had
to save her lover as well,” (King).
Additionally, “The Laws of Hammurabi see in married women acquiring their own
property (sikiltum) a danger for the welfare of the husband,” (Stol, 133). Any form of female
intelligence or independence was considered dangerous. A second regulation to the code
prescribed “the physical mutilation of women who resisted the destruction of their autonomy,
legalized woman beating,” (Rohrlich, 97). The code stated, “The woman who has sinned by
saying something to a man which she should not have said…must have her teeth crushed with
burnt bricks upon which…her guilty deed has been inscribed.” (Rohrlich,99).
Archibald 9
With the harsh regulations and standards married women were held to, the only place
females experienced any sovereignty was under the blanket of religion. Any female individual
could join the sisterhood, in charge of worship and maintaining the temples; as powerful as the
male head-of-household was, he had no authority to prevent his daughter from joining. However,
the activities of female priests were eventually severely restricted by the Code of Hammurabi:
“A Sal-Me priestess, or Nin-An priestess not living in a cloister, opening a wine shop, or even
entering one” was “to be burnt,” (King). They did not retain nearly as many rights as male
citizens, but nevertheless they were treated with a considerable amount of respect and reverence.
While writing his code, Hammurabi’s goal was to improve the overall morality and
welfare of his Babylonian empire. However, with the decline in women’s rights, many
unforeseen problems arose. One major example was the emergence of street prostitution. During
the Sumerian era, there were numerous temple harlots. However, it was considered an honor to
sacrifice one’s virginity to the gods and goddesses one served. However, street prostitution
emerged when the social-roles were predominantly male and “women had been made legally and
economically dependent on men,” (Rohrlich, 91). The street prostitution was considered a great
evil and corrupted many people. Husbands frequently turned to harlots to satisfy their needs and
women used prostitution as a means of survival and escape from suppression (Rohrlich, 92).
Although the Code of Hammurabi sought to organize the chaos of ancient Babylonian
Society, it had many unintended consequences. Hammurabi not only stripped women of their
rights, but many others as well, all in the name of social order. The gap between the social
classes grew as did the discontent of the enslaved. Babylonia was essentially attacked from
within and discontent grew and loyalties dwindled. This made it possible, easy even for the
Assyrian Empire to overthrow and conquer Babylonia around 1200 B.C.
Archibald 10
An important lesson can be learned as a result. Though laws are necessary provide order
and justice for a society, too many regulations strip people of their rights and make social
mobility difficult. Little progress can be made when citizens are unhappy and restricted from
thinking and reasoning for themselves. Although the Code of Hammurabi succeeded in creating
structure and security, it failed to protect those of lower social value such as slaves and women.
Additionally, when the people started devaluing others based on the exterior, they missed
out and things gradually fell apart. Today, we must not place value on any person based on race,
gender, sexual orientation, social class, religion, or income; rather, we should place value on who
the person is on the inside, what they can contribute, their strengths, and ultimately their divine
potential. The Hammurabi era proves that running a functional society requires a careful balance
between firm laws and social independence.
Archibald 11
Works Cited
Adams, Robert McC. "The Evolution of Urban Society." Chicago: Aldine-Atherton (1966): 3,
87. JSTOR. Web.
Boulding, Elise. "The Underside of History." Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press (1963):
693. JSTOR. Web.
Jacobsen, Thorkild. "Treasures of Darkness." Yale University Press (1976): 26, 39, 113, 141+.
JSTOR. Web
Johns, C. H. W. "Notes on the Code of Hammurabi." Chicago Journals: The American
Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 19.2 (1903): n. pag. JSTOR. The
University of Chicago Press. Web.
King, L. W. "The Avalon Project : Code of Hammurabi." The Avalon Project : Code of
Hammurabi. Yale University, n.d. Web. 08 Jan. 2013.
Kramer, Samuel N. "Sumerian Mythology." New York: Harper Torchbooks (1961): 39. JSTOR.
Web.
Luckenbill, D. D. "The Temple Women of the Code of Hammurabi." The American Journal of
Semitic Languages and Literatures 34.1 (1917): 1-12. JSTOR. The University of Chicago
Press. Web.
Matthew, Kevin. "Re: If There Are Women's Studies, Why Aren't There Men's Studies?
Amirite?" Web log comment. Amirite. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.
Archibald 12
Mellaart, James. "By Neolithic Artists of 7500 Years Ago--Statuettes from Hacilar, Unique for
Quantity, Variety, Beauty, and Preservation." Illustrated London News (1961): 231.
JSTOR. Web.
Prostgate, J. N. "On Some Assyrian Ladies." Iraq 41 (1979): 89-103. JSTOR. Web.
Rohrlich, Ruby. "State Formation in Sumer and the Subjugation of Women." Feminist Studies
6.1 (1980): 76-102. JSTOR. Feminist Studies Inc. Web.
Stol, M. "Women in Mesopotamia." Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient
38.2 (1995): 123-44. JSTOR. BRILL. Web.
Wooley, C. Leonard. "The Sumerians." New York: W. W. Norton & Co., (1965): 66. JSTOR.
Web.