Read the following excerpt from the Code of Hammurabi, make a guess as to the intent of the law and its subsequent punishment, written in one paragraph. In another paragraph, discuss what this law might have to say about Babylonian civilization. If you are unable to post your paragraphs on the blog, please be sure to print them, and bring them to class.
“If a female tavern-keeper does not accept corn according to gross weight in payment of a drink, but takes money, and the price of the drink is less than that of the corn, she shall be convicted and thrown into the water.”
19 comments:
My guess to as the intent of the law from the Code of Hammurabi is this. My guess is that in this specific law, the Babylonians have something against women and think them lower than men. I believe they had less rights and were not treated fairly due to their sex back then. Also I think that in this law the intent was to deter women from owning or making money by giving punishment of death if they were to take money instead of corn, and the drink cost less than the corn. SO the intent of the law, I think, is to discourage women from working and making money. My guess to what the subsequent punishment is, is death by drowning as is shown in the last part of the law. "she shall be convicted and thrown into the water."
What I think this law might have to say about Babylonian civilization is this. As I briefly mentioned in the last paragraph I believe that women were treated unfairly and were given less rights due to their sex. Also I think that from this law they also did not want women to own or make money. These are my thoughts/guesses as to what this law means and what we can learn from it.
Jacob McGrath
What a strange law! Although we will probably never know the lawmaker’s intent in giving this decree, we can, however, make educated guesses. Mine is this: the lawmaker wanted to discourage women from being tavern-keepers. The clearest evidence for this assumption is that the law only applies to female tavern-keepers and not male ones. If the lawmaker had wanted to establish corn instead of money as the primary payment for drinks, the lawmaker would have designed the law to include all tavern-keepers. The punishment is just as strange as the law itself. Unless ‘the water’ is some kind of slang term for a Babylonian prison, I can only assume that if a female tavern-keeper is convicted of breaking this law, she would literally be thrown into water. Even though we shall likely never know for certain what was intended through this law, it is still very interesting to interpret what was considered common law in ancient times!
However odd and obscure this law might be, it provides three fascinating insights on Babylonian culture. First, women were not viewed in a very favorable light. This is clearly shown through the obvious discrimination against female tavern-keepers as opposed to male ones. Second, corn was an acceptable form of payment. Even different in value from money, corn seems to be a somewhat reasonable reimbursement for a drink. Last, being thrown into water was an acceptable and common form of punishment. This is supported by the fact that several of the laws in Hammurabi’s code involve this sort of punishment. Although this little-known law is ancient, and somewhat bizarre, it provides some interesting perceptions into ancient Babylonian culture.
As to the Hammurabi law:
I notice that the law says that it applies if the "price of the drink is less than that of the corn," which would make me think that the law is just to allow those who don't have much money, at least corn farmers, to buy drink with what they have. The fact that it only applies to female tavern keepers makes me think that it may have to do with the fact that women had less rights. If mostly men attended taverns, then it could be that the woman had to submit to the man and accept his payment.
As to what the law has to show about Babylonian civilization:
As I said in the previous paragraph, it seems to show that women had to submit to men. Either that, or that there was an incredible, stated, difference between women's rights and men's. The fact that the law states that women could own/keep a tavern, does show that women had the right to do business, even if it was discouraged by the law. The punishment also seems to show that many Babylonians, or at least Babylonian women, could not swim very well.
The most probable intent of this law was to keep tavern keepers - in this case, female tavern keepers - from discriminating against farmers, or the poor. Both farmers and the poor during this time period were more likely to pay in goods such as corn. A (female) tavern keeper would be inclined, though, to take money instead of corn because of the usefulness of the money to her vs. the usefulness of the corn (money could buy her x, whereas corn would really only serve for food and little else). To keep things fair among the people, this law was put in place. With a law like this, the poor or farmers who may have had only corn to give as their "money" would still be able to stay in or eat at taverns, without having to worry about whether or not their "money" would be accepted.
This law can tell us a lot about Babylonian Civilization. It gives a peek into what kind of worldview the people during this day in age would generally have held. Hammurabi was a very fair man, and felt that the poor and rich alike should be treated the same. With laws in general being as influential as they are and during this time made to be inclusive and fair to all no matter socioeconomic status, it is fair to say that the general population's worldview would have been a very empathetic one. Also, with fairness being such a emphasis in this culture, it is plausible that you wouldn't have seen a large difference in class - thus resulting in lower crime, smaller differences in IQs, stronger relationships in general, a low-stress society, etc. By simply studying a law such as this from another culture, we can clearly see what worldviews the civilization would have held and the resulting structure of society.
I believe this law was put into place to enforce fairness and honesty from the tavern keepers, specifically the female tavern keepers. Money was apparently a more valuable currency than corn in Babylonian society. This law enforces tavern keepers to accept corn as an equally fair form of payment. If a female tavern keeper cheated her customer in this way, the phrase “being thrown into the water” implies death as the subsequent punishment sentenced to the offender. Failing to accept a payment for a drink when the payment was of equal value than the price of the drink is unjust, but death is an extremely cruel sentence for a petty crime.
There are many things we can draw from this law about Babylonian society. The harsh punishment for breaking this law suggests that fairness was highly important in Babylonian civilization. We can assume the Babylonians valued justice, but on the basis of social and economic rank. A female tavern keeper could end up dead by committing so “small” an offence as cheating a costumer. There was very little room for mercy in this society, especially for women of the lower class. This law shows that female tavern keepers were considered to be of little value, and could be easily replaced.
From what I can determine the intent of the was to help eliminate the tavern-keeper from cheating someone with the price of a drink. When the tavern-keeper wants money instead of the corn for the payment of the drink she is trying to get more then what the drink is actually worth. The intent might also be that since the women back then were not treated with anywhere near the same rights as men the Babylonians might not have wanted women earning or receiving actual money. The intent of the law like all laws are to punish. But in this law the the person convicted would most likely not live. This an extreme punishment for not a big crime.
What this law might say about Babylonian civilization is that they like order and keeping that order by extreme punishments. The Babylonians took their punishment for crime way to seriously. The Code of Hammurabi may have been super strict and some times just down right cruel and if people have to abide by a cruel code then they will become cruel themselves.
I think that the law means to stop female tavern keepers from lying. When I say that I mean that if she were to take the money over the corn she then could then later go to the authorities and say that the man had cheated her. Then have him punished and possibly receive more money. Which would have been deceitful. As for the punishment, it isn't very clear. Was she just thrown into a body of water? Or were there crocodiles? Was she thrown off a cliff into the water? Or maybe she had weights tied to her legs? Either way it probably was not pleasant, and was there for used as a warning to other female tavern keepers not to do the same.
It looks like the Babylonians did not show a lot if mercy to women, similar to the roman culture. It also seems that the government thought f every possible crime, that or the Babylonian people had a very evil will and thought of every thing possible and the government created some of the craziest laws trying to combat the crime.
~ Aidan
This law in Hammurabi’s code, though seemingly ridiculous compared to the type of laws we have today, no doubt served a very specific purpose. In a world where survival was so important, food was treasured and could be bartered with possibly even more value the money. If a tavern-keeper refused to accept corn from farmers and only took money, even if it was less valuable, that would be a cheat to the farmer and could damage the economy. Or if one person should receive more or less than the equal amount in the corn/drink/money value then they must be punished or else others would follow in making exceptions.
This law also gives us a picture of what was life was like in ancient Babylon. Bartering is common. Corn is a popular crop. Fairness is key. The role of women also appears different from the role of men, a female bartender being singled out. Also it shows that even one small mistake can make a person lose his life, making following the laws most likely a matter of fear.
It appears to me that the most likely reason for this law is to prevent discrimination against farmers or any poor person who could only pay with corn, as opposed to money, even if the money would be more useful to the woman. However, it appears to me, because of the context, that it is not necessarily true that specifically women that are being discriminated, or perhaps it is only a secondary reason. In fact, there were two words for "tavern-keeper," one of which was a masculine version, and the other a feminine version. This means "female tavern-keeper" is, in fact one word, perhaps implying that the law might apply to men and women alike, although not specifically stated as such. Furthermore, the Code of Hammurabi is also well-known for being fair to men and women alike, particularly in comparison to most any other civilizations' laws of the time. The intended punishment of this law seems to be that if convicted, the guilty woman shall be subject to drowning or a version of trial by water (in which a person is thrown into the river, and if they are able to swim to shore, they are proven innocent.) This seems to be a likely alternative as the law does not necessarily sentence the woman to death.
This law suggests that Babylonians were rather progressive in terms of fairness to others, compared to the civilizations around them. While it may be seen as discriminating based on gender, the law not only does not discriminate against the poor (as a farmer would be), but also disallows discrimination against the poor by the commoner (as a tavern-keeper would be). In other civilizations at that time, the rich were nearly universally given better treatment by the law--which is clearly not what happens in the case of this law.
This law applies to the female population of tavern keepers during the Babylonian era. It states that when a drink is purchased, the same amount of corn by wight is offered as payment to the amount of drink being purchased. If the price of corn is more expensive than the price of the drink, and she accepts money instead of said corn, she is punished and cast into a river. The law makes absolutely no sense, because if she takes the money, she is accepting less payment that if she were to take the corn. To simplify, the same amount of something more expensive as what is being payed for, is being used to make a purchase of said thing. In a way, the tavern keeper is actually being punished for giving her customers discounts. The punishment listed, “thrown into the water,” does not seem all that bad, since it is possible for one to learn how to swim. Due to the fact that the Babylonians had a large amount of laws, it is entirely possible that they consolidated the text and shortened the actual details of what the punishments actually involved. For all we know, the intent of the punishment was to kill the person by tying them up and then casting them into the water. Because these laws were written such a long time ago, historians do not know exactly what was intended. It is, however, possible that the Babylonians sought to discourage females from buying and selling goods, because that would relate directly to the economy through taxes. There are many environmental factors that can affect the accuracy of information, as well as the fact that we just simply don’t know how these people thought.
This set of laws is one of the oldest recorded, and was written in c.1760 B.C. These laws give us insight to the Babylonian culture. This one in particular, shows us that much like today, there were shop keepers and tavern keepers. Each city had their own methods of producing goods and distributing them, as well as methods of payment. It also reflects the seriousness of the punishments if laws were disobeyed. The Babylonian civilization had a terrible disregard to women. It was common for women of the ancient times to be disrespected. This can possibly explain the fact as to why this law is specifically for women, this one in particular targets, “female tavern keepers.” Though this law doesn’t touch up on what happens to men when they accept pay for drink, one might imagine that they were not punished as severely, or even at all. I believe the intent of this law was to take privileges from the female population, therefore giving insight to a culture where power was given only to men.
It's most logical to start with the first part of this code: A female tavern-keeper. This means that the law assumes that men won't violate it or it simply doesn't apply to them. The latter is more probable because it is more concrete (how could they ensure that men never violate the law?). It also makes sense because women were not valued as highly in ancient culture, so having a law that only applied to women would be acceptable and probably not unheard of.
The other part of the code has to do with an exchange of commodities/money for a drink, and how to do that properly. It seems as either they don't want women discriminating against farmers (or people paying with corn) or they're worried that women would give someone a drink for less than its worth. Either way it deals with fairness. So then the next question is: why does it only apply to women? Because it was a culture that didn't value women as highly, it could be that they were worried women would run taverns unfairly. And therefore implemented harsh laws to ensure they were fair.
So in summary, it seems as though the law is a way of ensuring that female tavern-keepers run the tavern fairly.
I think the reason this law was created was to make sure that the women tavern-keepers were being honest and fair. Women would accept money, but not corn.(Money was probably much more useful to the women.) However, some people, like the farmers, paid for things using corn. So, when the tavern-keepers would not accept the corn, the farmers were being discriminated against.
I think that this law shows that the Babylonians valued fairness and equality. It also can be assumed that there were many farmers because corn was a popular form of trade. Another thing that we can learn, is that there was a need for laws like this one. Not everyone was honest. It seems to melike the women especially, were notorious for breaking this law.
Code of Hammurabi response: Emily Knospe Thursday Sophomore
The following law is in the Hammurabi Code: “If a female tavern-keeper does not accept corn according to gross weight in payment of a drink, but takes money, and the price of the drink is less than that of the corn, she shall be convicted and thrown into the water.” This code is saying, that if a female tavern keeper doesn’t accept a gross weight cost in corn for a drink she must accept a payment in money. She’ll be convicted and thrown into the water if she accidentally (or purposefully) messes up the math and ends up accepting less money than the drinks actually worth.
This law says something about the differences between men and women in the Babylonian Civilization. The law specifically says a female tavern keeper, so if a male does it he won’t be convicted and thrown into the water. I also see it saying that there should be a fair price and payment to both seller and buyer when selling things.
At first glance, this law seems very strange, and even sexist. After all, why only mention female tavern-keepers? However, looking further, it becomes apparent that this law is simply an attempt to increase fairness. It’s very possible that tavern-keepers were primarily women. It’s also possible that there was only a problem with fairness in the cases of female tavern-keepers. There is also a possibility of the tavern-keepers accepting money for other services. To continue, it would appear that the penalty for this is death by being “thrown into the water,” most likely drowning. This would be to eliminate the cheater, and also discourage others from committing a similar act of unfairness.
What this tells us about Babylonian culture is first of all, they did not tolerate cheating or unfairness. It was very clear that any attempt at cheating someone out of money or a drink would be swiftly dealt with. There was zero tolerance for dishonesty. The second thing it tells us is that, like most (if not all) ancient cultures, the Babylonians were not afraid to use capital punishment. The death penalty was carried out even in a minor case of cheating someone. It also was used for women. Third, and more minor, it shows us that to pay for a drink, multiple things could be used. It uses the example of corn, and we can come to the conclusion that it was a common occurrence for goods to be simply exchanged instead of currency being used.
The law is if a female tavern-keeper were to refuse payment for a drink in corn according to the gross weight but takes money as payment for the drink and the cost of the drink in money is more than that of the corn, she is guilty and will be thrown into the water. The intent of the law is to make sure that no one is cheated out of their money by paying more with money than paying with corn would cost. The punishment is, if this was to happen and someone was cheated out of their money, the female tavern-keeper would be considered guilty and thrown into the water to drown. The intent of the law is to keep people safe from those who would take their money and to keep people from cheating people out of or stealing money from others.
This law says a few things about Babylonian civilization, first of all it says that this is a “men’s” society and women aren’t considered equal or as important as men. This is shown in the first couple words of the law where it specifically says ‘female tavern-keeper.’ This particular law says nothing about a punishment for men if they were to do the same thing, only women. This law also shows us that punishments were very harsh and severe even if the crime was something that would be considered a lesser crime in our society. The punishment for breaking this law was to be thrown into the water, and it can be assumed that they were not expecting to have a nice swim after they were thrown in. Also, laws made back then were very specific, they are each for a particular situation. And because of how specific these laws were they probably had many, many laws each talking about specific situations and how to punish those guilty of breaking them. Babylonian society is shown in the law in how they didn’t have a respect for women, had severe punishments, and were particular about how and why they punished guilty people.
This passage was a tad confusing but I think I finally got it. It seems just a law on fairness. It also seems to be a law against women tavern keepers. Perhaps this lawmaker thought women were dishonest? Women weren’t thought of as highly back in those days, perhaps it was to discourage them from trying to run a business. Also maybe it was to discourage them from taking advantage of drunks? But if that was so, men would be able to take advantage of drunks and not women, again a bit confusing if you ask me.
I believe this says that Men where higher slandered in the Babylonian empire than the women, like in many ancient civilizations. Also they seem to love fairness, and to enforce it very brutally. This was so in many ancient civilizations, their code of law was violent and disturbing, but it kept people in their place, which is the purpose of a law.
Josh - I think this law is in place to keep the economy of the Babylonian empire up. Let's remember that corn did not have to mean maze it just meant the most predominate crop in that culture. I think the law was made to encourage the transfer of corn over that of raw money. This could have been so that poorer farmers could have a drink with-out having to break the bank. It allowed them to trade would they had. Also it might have been difficult back then to mass produce a currency that could not easily be forged or faked. The emplacement of this law would force Female tavern-keepers to take corn over money, reducing the amount of currency that was needed to be made. This law may have been in place at other places not just a tavern. The punishment seams harsh but I think that back then it might not have seamed so.
This can tell us 3 main things about the Babylonian Empire. First, The punishment does seam harsh but I think that back them in the Babylonian Empire I might have been assumed that you obeyed the rules or you where severely punished or even killed. Next I think it tells us that they were trying to be both fair and smart. Allowing someone to pay for something with what they had (Corn instead of money) seems fair, while at the same time reducing the amount of currency printed. Finally I think it tells us that men had more freedom it the Babylonian empire then women. We can note that this law only implies to women. I'm not sure why, but it does seam to indicate that men had more freedom then women.
(Anna L; Thursday sophomore)
The following is my interpretation of the Code of Hammurabi. I believe that this law is addressing the problem of tavern keepers(or possibly anyone selling and buying) cheating the second party out of some of their money while making a transaction. Think about this situation from a possible perspective of the female tavern keeper though. What if corn was harder for people to trade with because people wanted actual hard money. I could see where wanting the customer to pay with more corn if they would not give the preferred currency. This of course may not be the case. The punishment is that the guilty party is thrown into the water. This punishment could mean a number of things because of how vague it is. Will they chain you up and then drown you or simply throw you into a small puddle?
What might this say about the Babylonian civilization? I see three things. First that they are very good at making laws that can easily be taken many ways! Second that they used more than just money to make transactions or trades. And thirdly, assuming that the rule means exactly what it says, that they lived by many harsh rules that often had very harsh punishments. Over all I believe that this rule in a general sense is a good law but could use a little bit a negotiation.
Post a Comment