Hammurabi’s Biography: A Bit too Rosy?

We have now finished reading King Hammurabi by Marc Van De Mieroop, and we have seen his interpretations on the life of Hammurabi and his accomplishments during the time. We have seen the cities that he conquered, the kingdom that he possessed, the “justice” that he helped to dish out, his law codes, and his power and influence. However, to me, Van De Mieroop’s depiction of Hammurabi as the world-influential leader of the ancient world seems just too rosy for me. There are very few controversies that Van De Mieroop even brings up, and he is left focusing solely on Hammurabi’s famed accomplishments and legacy.

If we take a look at Chapter 10 in Van De Mieroop’s biography, the entire chapter talks about the greatness that he done, and there is nothing said about anything negative about Hammurabi. Yes, in Chapter 11, Van De Mieroop talks about the challenges of finding primary documents to back up any factual evidence about Hammurabi, since he lived so long ago. In addition, because Babylon is in a location where it is currently flooded, archaeologists cannot dig up and excavate the city, and thus, it is very difficult to get documents from Babylon, where Hammurabi lived and ruled. Much of the information comes from the city of Mari, but because Hammurabi had conquered it and brought all the sensitive material (communications) to Babylon, much of that information is also currently unavailable for studying. So, we only have a few documents and letters that are available to be read and deciphered what they mean, and it is up to authors like Van De Mieroop to help reconstruct Hammurabi’s life into a concise and flowing story for us, the readers, to understand. So, I would totally understand if there were accomplishments listed but not any of the negative aspects of Hammurabi’s life, simply because that information may not be available. However, it is still up to the author to paint an objective picture of Hammurabi even with this biased information. Obviously, given the common nature of humans, it is impossible for Hammurabi to not have made any mistakes in his four decades of rule, and that should definitely be brought out.

For example, in Chapter 10, Van De Mieroop talks about Hammurabi and his codes of law, as well as the positive lights that are portrayed of Hammurabi. He points out that Hammurabi was a shining example of a great king, and later generations were inspired by him (Van De Mieroop 122-123). Van De Mieroop repeats over and over that Hammurabi was a just king and that he brought peace throughout the land. However, Van De Mieroop seems to discount the fact that Hammurabi had conquered the entire region of cities and had pretty much backstabbed many of his political allies. It was also clear that Hammurabi wanted the best for him and nobody else and was cunning in his war and battle strategies. However, Van De Mieroop praises Hammurabi as a great warrior and one who was very noble and honorable (Van De Mieroop 124). Apparently, there are also poems about Hammurabi as well, with even greater praise about how Hammurabi was able to influence the Biblical laws and future laws to come. However, Van De Mieroop fails to remind that there were other codes of law that were very similar in nature and are not as boastful and propaganda-like as the one that Hammurabi helped create.

To me, it just seems that Van De Mieroop seems to gloss over a lot of details and gaps of information, and he paints a picture of someone who was definitely just, and there was to be peace all over the land. While that may have been true to some extent, I don’t believe that Hammurabi would be a better leader than the ones that we have today- I truly believe that with a rule of over four decades, there must have been some mishaps and trouble with Hammurabi, and Van De Mieroop fails to bring that up at all for us, the readers, to consider. Yes, these may be the “facts” that Van De Mieroop gets from primary sources, but we also have to realize that many of these documents were commanded and written for the sole purpose of putting Hammurabi into a better light, probably to show off his legacy to future kings as well as appease the groups of people that Hammurabi wronged during his conquests.