“As a literal translation, then, largely without notes or other clarity, readers are left to make what they can from the meaning or values that emerge from ancient Sumeria.”

This is for one of the original translations, by C.H.W. Johns, around 1903. 

It’s difficult to write a review of an ancient text, one of the first in recorded history, as if could be considered alongside a Dan Brown novel. So rather than attempt that, I am rating it for the reader experience per this translation.

Scattered fragments and quotations from Hammurabi abound across the internet, some of them completely false, so having the original text (as complete or not as it was at the time) in one place is itself a pleasure. We notice immediately that while there are sets of laws which appear to have been written together (all of the infidelity laws more or less together, all of the real estate laws together, etc.), there is otherwise no real overall organization–the text was assembled in pieces or with some other organizational concern. Johns says nothing of this nor much else: only that previous translations had been more interpretations and paraphrase, and therefore he felt a more literal version in English was necessary. He also speaks briefly to the difficulty of translating anything that is written upon stone columns. 

As a literal translation, then, largely without notes or other clarity, readers are left to make what they can from the meaning or values that emerge from ancient Sumeria. Class by wealth was obviously important, for instance, for poor criminals were not expected to suffer as severe consequences generally; nor, however, were they receiving compensation at the same level for crimes done against them. For its time, it is fairly progressive, however, in terms of finding balance (based more upon reconciliatory punishments in fair evenhandedness across professions and genders rather than punishments like incarceration). What happens socio-economically for someone who, say, loses his hands, is up to us to guess. Does he become a burden on the city? Or excluded and indigent? 

Woe, however, to those who take from others–whether thieves, mal-practitioners, or those who work to break up families. Unless this involved folks without status, such as slaves, the punishments were quite strict. And, since we are left with merely this long series of some 300 laws, most all in an “If (crime), then (punishment)” format, all of my claims so far are interpretations from the patterns of the list.

In the end, what a reader gets is a fairly long but briefly-worded list, a drudge to go through in a single sitting, but easy enough in bits and pieces. What Johns’ translation lacks in poetry or explanation it gains for simplicity and a quick reading.