The Laws of Hammurabi, preserved on the Susa stele now in the Louvre, is a primary source of the first order, the actual inscribed law code issued in the name of the Babylonian king, one of the most complete surviving bodies of ancient Near Eastern law. As the physical artifact and its inscribed text itself, it carries direct authority for what the code prescribed and how it framed royal justice as divinely sanctioned. It is a royal promulgation rather than a neutral historical record of actual legal practice, and the degree to which its provisions were applied in everyday Babylonian courts, as opposed to serving primarily as a monumental statement of royal ideology, remains a genuine question Assyriologists continue to weigh against other surviving Babylonian legal and administrative documents from the same period.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
The Laws of Hammurabi, preserved on the Susa stele now in the Louvre, is the actual inscribed law code itself, treated at the top tier as a primary source of the first order for what the code prescribed, notwithstanding that its actual everyday application remains a genuine open question. NotesThe diorite stele excavated at Susa in 1901 and held in the Louvre.
Citation
AuthorAnonymous, issued in the name of Hammurabi of Babylon
Source Typeprimary-text
Connections
Associated With
This source names Babylonians directly: "The Laws of Hammurabi, preserved on the Susa stele now in the Louvre, is a primary source of the first order, the actual inscribed law code issued in the name of the Babylonian king, one of the most..."
Source The Laws of Hammurabi (the Susa stele, Louvre)Anonymous, issued in the name of Hammurabi of Babylon
Claims Backed By This Source (15 claims)
This source backs 15 claims across the atlas. As facts: 14 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds.
Disposition By Topic
- Historical Figures, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Sources, 6 claims: 5 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Articles, 2 claims: 2 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.