Hammurabi’s Laws on Family Relationships Shabonnie Hutchins World History to 1500 09/28/2018 HUTCHINS 1 Marriage in the Mesopotamia society was regarded as one of the most important institutions within the community, which explains the level of attention paid to observing the laws within marriage institutions. In the research conducted by Stol, different sources of first hand information, including records from the period preserved through history indicate that marriage served as the pinnacle of family units.1The basis of the marriage unit was payment of dowry by the husband, which then gave him and his wife the authority to live alone within their desired area of residence. However, the research also asserts that the society at the time left room for divorce as was provided for in the Hammurabi laws, where the husband would gift her wife in the divorce process. In essence, the research study helps create a link between the laws of Hammurabi on marriage, and the contemporary view of the institution in relation to family relationships. With the catholic church having been against divorce, the research help determine the extensive history of the concept of divorce and organization in the process. The research helps affirm some of the concepts to be used in the paper on the family unit from Hammurabi laws’ perspective, thereby contributing to higher credibility on the paper. In any case, history research is based on synthesizing facts from different sources to ascertain where the truth lies on certain issues. Stol helps build on the concept of families in relation to marriage and divorce. 1 MartenStol, "Women in Mesopotamia," Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 38, no. 2 (1995): 123. HUTCHINS 2 References Stol, Marten. "Women in Mesopotamia." Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 38, no. 2 (1995): 123-144. Primary Source Compare/Contrast Paper Checklist 1. Mechanics (Technical Quality)  Paper is saved as a Microsoft Word file type (i.e. a .doc or .docx file)  Title Page: Put your name, class name, and title of the paper on this page.  At least 1000 words (not including title page, footnotes, or bibliography, approx. 3-5 double-spaced pages).  12-pt type, Times New Roman, one-inch margins, double-spaced.  You should not put your name or a title on the first page of the body your paper or in a header. The title page makes this unnecessary.  Paragraphs are correctly formatted: First line of each paragraph is indented. There is not an extra space between paragraphs.  Pages are numbered in the upper right hand corner of the paper. Do not put your name or any other information with the page number.  Footnotes conform to style for history papers (Chicago Manual of Style examples found on example sheet posted on Canvas), each have their own number, and are in 10 pt font.  Bibliography conforms to standard style (Chicago Manual of Style examples found on handout posted on Canvas)  Author has carefully proofread the paper for spelling, typing, and grammar errors. 2. Topic and Sources  Topic is an appropriate Source from the Past from the acceptable list.  Paper uses required additional scholarly history source related to the content of the document written by an historian after 1960.  Content of the paper, bibliography, and notes reflect an appropriate use of both primary and secondary sources to support the author’s thesis and develop his/her argument.  Content of the paper answers the questions how and why the primary source document is similar to the content of the scholarly source.  Content of the paper answers the questions how and why the primary source document is different from the content of the scholarly source. 3. Thesis – The paper has a clear, significant thesis statement included in the introduction telling how the Source from the Past is similar and/or different from the scholarly source. 4. Introduction – The paper has a clear introduction that describes the Source form the Past and scholarly source used and includes the thesis statement. 5. Body of the Paper  Paragraphs are well organized to present required evidence and interpretation supporting the thesis in a logical, coherent fashion.  Paragraphs are linked with transitions and summary statements.  Research cited (i.e. evidence) is relevant and supports the thesis.  Source from the Past and scholarly sources are read and interpreted carefully.  Quotations are used selectively and appropriately. No block quotations are used. 6. Conclusion  Adequately addresses the “so what” factor (states the most important conclusion and its significance).  Summarizes the evidence presented to support the thesis in the body of the paper.  Restates the thesis statement clearly. 7. Clarity of expression/thought  Sentences are clear, complete, and engaging.  Paper is written in the past tense.  Author uses the active instead of passive voice as much as possible.  There are no errors in Standard English usage, punctuation, or spelling.  Word choice is careful and appropriate.  There are no colloquial expressions or slang.  Paper is written in the third person. No personal pronouns are used (i.e. I, me, we)  All parts of the paper address the thesis clearly. Christianity in the Roman Empire Student McStudent History 104: World History Since 1500 April 20, 2016 1 In 251 C.E., a massive plague struck the Roman Empire killing up to 5000 people a day. This plague came during a period of political and social problems known as the “Crisis of the Third Century.”1 St. Cyprian in “St. Cyprian on Epidemic Disease in the Roman Empire” used Christianity to explain this epidemic and the associated problems.2 In The Influence of Christianity upon the Roman Empire, Arthur McGiffert describes the same plague as St. Cyprian confirming most of the facts included in the “Source from the Past,” but disputes St. Cyprian’s claims that the plague was caused by the Christian god and was a positive event for Roman Christians. McGiffert provides evidence that the importance of Christianity in the Roman Empire has been greatly exaggerated by St. Cyprian and other scholars.3 Overall, St. Cyprian’s writings present an accurate picture of life in the Roman Empire during the third century C.E. and describe the effects of large-scale disease. In the source, “St. Cyprian on Epidemic Disease in the Roman Empire,” everything is attributed to Christianity. According to Cyprian, the very symptoms of the plague served as a “validation of the Christian faith”, basically because of the way Christians are supposed to react to the “gift of the times.”4 St. Cyprian wrote this source when the disease struck the empire in 251 C.E. to defend Christianity against the imperial authorities. Roman authorities claimed Christians and their rejection of the pagan gods were the cause of the epidemic. Because St. Cyprian was a bishop, he felt compelled to defend Christianity against this accusation. Even though he acknowledged the epidemic did not discriminate and that many Christians were dying because of the rampant illness, St. Cyprian’s predisposition caused him to state that “for the 1 Arthur Cushman McGiffert, The Influence of Christianity Upon the Roman Empire (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 28-49. 2 Jerry H. Bentley and Herbert Ziegler, eds, Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past, 5th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2010), 244. 3 McGiffert, The Influence of Christianity, 28-49. 4 Bentley and Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters, 244. 2 servants of God it is a welcome event, [whereas it] is a pestilence for the Jews and the pagans and the enemies of Christ.”5 This is most likely because he felt Christians would go to heaven when they died whereas the others would not. It must have been easy for him to state that being affected with the disease was a welcome event for some, considering when he wrote this source he was not one of the people suffering from it. His position could have changed if he were suddenly struck with loosened bowels or fever, as he described others suffering from the plague to have. He goes on in the source to state that “the faithful receive protection, while the faithless receive retribution.”6 However, this statement serves as a contradiction to the previous acknowledgement that both believers and non-believers are falling victims. His argument that Christians were supposed to be protected is weakened by the fact that so many caught the plague and died. This inconsistency demonstrates Saint Cyprian was not focused on documenting the plague factually, but was so focused on glorifying and defending Christianity that he did not even bother to make sure his statements were logical. Arthur Cushman McGiffert’s work reveals that it is not unusual for people to assume that Christianity had a constructive impact on the Roman Empire, but that these people have nothing substantial to back up their assumptions. He shows that Christianity had little influence in the formation of the Roman Empire and in its growth through the Mediterranean sea.7 St. Cyprian’s writings claim that Christianity provided followers some relief against the plague, but provides little evidence to back this up.8 According to McGiffert, Christianity was among the numerous religions that drew Roman interest and conflicted with Paganism.9 Because of this, as seen in the 5 Bentley and Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters, 244. Bentley and Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters, 244. 7 McGiffert, The Influence of Christianity, 29. 8 Bentley and Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters, 244. 9 McGiffert, The Influence of Christianity, 42-43. 6 3 introduction to Cyprian’s document, Christians needed to defend it against the attacks from the followers of other religions and against the pagan Roman government. Arthur McGiffert also states that Christianity claimed “to offer a solution of the great problems of the ages,”10 which is exactly what St. Cyprian states when he claims that Christians were “being liberated from the world” and “the just are called to refreshment.”11 These few key similarities are important because they are enough to show that while the source by St. Cyprian is not exactly accurate in terms of the ideas it expresses, it is an accurate representation of how Roman Christians felt about their religion in the third century C.E. The two sources also show major differences. While the primary source document does claim Christianity has the answers to everything, McGiffert explains that this really was not the case. For example, some scholars have claimed that the end of Roman slavery and gladiatorial combat, as well as the increase in charity work undertaken by Roman people are changes caused by wide-scale conversion to Christianity. However, they neglect to delve in further and notice that there is really no direct cause and effect relationship in these areas. Christians really did not protest slavery, gladiatorial combat was ended by a decree from the emperor and was not widely protested by the Christian church, and charity work was encouraged by paganism as well as Christianity.12 McGiffert also explains that “bitter hostility was aroused”13 as well as spite in regards to the new developing religion; however, St. Cyprian conveniently left these out. These differences are important because they serve to highlight St. Cyprian’s biases even further. I believe that the primary source document is accurate in its picture of the times but not in its opinion that Christianity answered everything. The document’s accurate picture makes it 10 McGiffert, The Influence of Christianity, 44. Bentley and Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters, 244. 12 McGiffert, The Influence, 30, 32, 34. 13 McGiffert, The Influence, 43. 11 4 important because it explains to the reader how devoted people of the time were to defending their positions and religion. Its inaccurate opinion is also important because, since it was widely circulated, it indoctrinated many others to share that position. We see this in Arthur McGiffert’s source because it states that many people today share the opinion that Christianity was beneficial to the Roman Empire.14 St. Cyprian’s document demonstrates accuracy, not in using Christianity as an explanation for the plague but in providing readers with information on beliefs and arguments of Roman Christians in the third century C.E. He provides us with evidence of how people thought and what was truly happening in 251 C.E. Arthur Cushman McGiffert’s document is of course accurate in every sense of the word because, unlike St. Cyprian, he had access to a wide range of sources on the period. McGiffert explains how St. Cyprian, and many other writers, assumed Christianity offered answers about the success of the Roman Empire. Although he lacked a wide range of evidence, St. Cyprian’s observations of the plague prove useful to modern readers, and his explanations show how Roman Christians in the third century C.E. argued in support of their religion. The Influence of Christianity upon the Roman Empire helps to prove the importance of “St. Cyprian on Epidemic Disease in the Roman Empire” by giving evidence that, although Cyprian’s work had some flaws in cause, it provided accurate information on Roman Christian beliefs and the plague itself. 14 McGiffert, The Influence, 28. 5 Works Cited Bentley, Jerry H. and Herbert F. Ziegler, eds. Traditions & Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past. Combined Volume. 5th Edition. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2010. McGiffert, Arthur C. The Influence of Christianity Upon the Roman Empire. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Primary Source Compare/Contrast Paper Grading Sheet This is the rubric that will be used to grade your papers. 1. Mechanics (technical quality): Correct font and size, format, notes, bibliography, meets length requirement (10% of grade) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 2 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent Comments: 2. Topic and Sources: Approved topic with appropriate sources (5%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 1 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent Comments: 3. Introduction (with thesis): Draws the reader in, sets the context for the paper, states the thesis (15%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 3 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Comments: Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent 4. Main Body a. Organization: Paragraphs support the thesis in a logical, coherent way (15%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 3 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent Comments: b. Quality of Research: Use of sources to support & explain thesis, appropriate citations and quotation (10%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 2 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent Comments: c. Interpretation: Explains significance of research to support the thesis, addresses objections (20%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 4 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Comments: Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent 5. Conclusion: Summarizes the argument and significance of the paper (the “so what” factor) (10%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 2 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Very Strong Excellent Comments: 6. Clarity of expression/thought: Paper is well written (15%) 3*-----------3.5 ---------3.75 -----------4 -----------4.25 -----------4.5 -----------4.75 -----------5 x 3 = _____ Unacceptable “C” Minimally Acceptable “C+“ Acceptable “B” Strong “B+” “A” Comments: Paper Subtotal: __________ Deductions: Paper Topic: Source List & Description: Paper Update: Late Penalty: Total Deductions: ______ A______ U (-5) ________ A______ U (-5) ________ A ______ U (-5) ________ _____________ Paper Total points/percentage: _______________ Very Strong Excellent Chy en lived ne time, power ariety of m such Sourcesfromthepast Hammurabi's Laws on Family Relationships dividual es were omen's Fects of [140] If he be a freed man he shall give her one-third of a mina of gold. PART [141] If a man's wife, who lives in his house, wishes to leave it, plunges into debt, tries to ruin her house, neglects her husband, and is judicially convicted: if her husband offer her release, she may go on her way, and he gives her nothing as a gift of release. If her husband does not wish to release her, and if he takes another wife, she shall remain as servant in her hus- band's house. [142] If a woman quarrels with her husband, and says: "You are not congenial to me," the reasons for her prejudice must be presented. If she is guiltless, and there is no fault on her part, but he leaves and neglects her, then no guilt attaches to this woman, she shall take her dowry and go back to her father's house. [143] If she is not innocent, but leaves her husband, and ruins her house, neglecting her husband, this woman shall be cast into the water. ds mean ked in an By the time of Hammurabi, Mesopotamian marriages had come to represent important business and economic relationships between families. Hammurabi's laws reflect a concern to ensure the legitimacy of children and to protect the economic interests of both marital partners and their families. While placing women under the authority of their fathers and husbands, the laws also protected women against unreasonable treatment by their husbands or other men. [128] If a man take a woman to be his wife, but has no inter- course with her, this woman is no wife to him. [129] If a man's wife be surprised having sexual relations with another man, both shall be tied and thrown into the water, but the husband may pardon his wife and the king may spare her. [130] If a man violates the wife (betrothed or child-wife) of another man, who has never known a man, and still lives in her father's house, and sleeps with her and be surprised, this man shall be put to death, but the wife is blameless. [131] If a man brings a charge against his wife, but she is not surprised with another man, she must take an oath and then may return to her house. [138] If a man wishes to separate from his wife who has borne him no children, he shall give her the amount of her pur- chase money and the dowry which she brought from her father's house, and let her go. [139] If there was no purchase price he shall give her one mina of gold as a gift of release. nt record and other heir lan inued for y tablets Although ту В.С.Е. ich each 1 For Further Reflection In what ways did Hammurabi's various provisions on family relationships protect the interests of different groups, such as husbands, wives, or the family itself? sound. into the Source: James B. Pritchard, ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955, pp. 171-72 IS Voca