Middle Assyrian Laws

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

As noted earlier, there are at least fifteen texts and fragments of the laws, which scholars have labeled A through O. Although some texts duplicate laws (C and G, for example), each text for the most part deals with a series of particular topics. Nearly every law (or paragraph) begins with a conditional statement, followed by a resolution (“if …, then …”). The subjects of the laws are two distinct social classes, free males and male and female slaves. However, free women (wives, widows, and certain classes of priestesses) are often discussed in these texts. Moreover, modern scholars have numbered the laws. For example, Tablet A, which is devoted almost entirely to situations concerning women, has been labeled from 1 to 59. There are no obvious divisions in the original text, so scholars have made reasoned decisions about where to divide one law from another. In addition, the laws are not arranged in a way that necessarily appeals to a modern, Western audience. It is necessary to explain and comment on them in terms of themes.

A1–10

This section deals with a variety of infractions, ranging from blasphemy and assault to theft and burglary. Assyrian criminal law contained a range of fixed penalties, including capital (death), talionic (punishment fitting the crime), corporal (mutilation or a series of lashes), and forced-labor penalties. The perpetrators were either men or women from the a'ilu class or male or female slaves. The a'ilu, at least in earlier Mesopotamian traditions, was considered an upper class. In the Middle Assyrian Laws, there is no easily recognizable middle class; individuals were from either the a'ilu or slave classes. The terms used for “slave” in the Assyrian law code were somewhat generic and not specific. They not only designated individuals who were controlled by others but also denoted anyone who was in some sense dependent upon another. Thus, all subjects of the king, including his high officials, were considered to a certain extent to be his slaves. There were also temple slaves, whose status was hereditary; captured prisoners of war; criminals; domestic servants; and those who were reduced to debt slavery, which was usually limited to the time it took to pay off debts. In many respects slavery was a form of personal dependence and was based upon economic necessity. The slave was comparatively deprived of a means of production that was more available to free citizens. Although slaves were often considered chattel, many slaves were allowed to remain with their families, own property, engage in economic activity, teach various trades, appear as witnesses, hire workers, and even own their own slaves.

Women in ancient Assyria were in many ways defined by their relationship to men, as is evident in the first two laws (A1–2). A woman was normally under the legal guardianship of a father, a brother, an uncle, a husband, or even a son in some cases. Women who did not have guardians (widows, orphans, prostitutes, or women who were in common-law arrangements) were considered to be outside the normal social and legal spheres, though in some cases women were able to enter into contract arrangements (such as buying and selling) in the name of an absent spouse. In the case of A2, though the woman is under the guardianship of a male, she alone is responsible for her offense; her male guardian is not liable. In the case of a woman who commits a sacrilege (described in A1), the authorities believed that only the gods by means of divination could make a determination of innocence or guilt.

Bodily mutilation is a significant theme throughout the extant sections of the Middle Assyrian Laws and the Assyrian Palace Edicts. Both slaves and free women were subject to having their ears and noses cut off for stealing (A4–5). In some cases female culprits who were accused of stealing or assaulting a man were subjected to a heavy fine and blows with rods (A7). Aggravated assault by a woman toward a man's reproductive organs was punished severely (A8). The woman had either a finger cut off or another significant body part gouged out. (The text is broken at this point.) It is not clear what type of assault against a free woman is alluded to in A9, but the attack is clearly obscene. The shekel described in this section is essentially the same term used in the Old Testament for weights. One shekel weighed approximately 8.33 grams. It is not certain whether the term lead refers to lead or to tin.

A11–20

In general this section concerns illegal sexual activity (though A11 is too fragmented to translate). In the case of adultery (A15), catching a couple in the act did not negate the need for a trial. As with other ancient Near Eastern codes, the guilty couple received similar punishments (or mercies). However, a man who was unaware of the marital status of the woman involved was declared innocent (A14), probably because free men had a greater degree of sexual freedom than did women (as long as these men did not infringe upon the sexual rights of other men).

The divine River Ordeal mentioned in A17 (found also in A22 and A24–25) is not explained, but it is a recurring theme in ancient Near Eastern legal codes and other texts (as late as 600 BCE). The punishment was prescribed by judges primarily to deal with cases of adultery and witchcraft in which there were no witnesses or to verify a person's testimony. Perhaps the binding agreement in A17 concerns the length to be covered in the water (for example, the Euphrates River) by the accused. In many cases it appears that the judge also decided on the person who would swim; the ordeal was often performed by a substitute. A letter from Mari (ca. 1800 BCE), a city on the Euphrates River in Syria near the present-day border of Iraq, indicates that the individual had to swim a long distance underwater before emerging successful. Individuals who drowned were literally “married to the river.” The river itself was considered to have the spirit of the river deity, who then determined the guilt or innocence of the accused, evidenced by the success or failure of the swimmer.

Active sodomy (A19–20) was a talionic capital crime; that is, the culprit was subjected to the same type of activity in which he participated. Although female homosexuality was hardly evidenced or mentioned, it was roundly condemned. Male homosexuality, however, was a more complicated issue. Although males were free to express themselves in nonsexual relations (equal male friendships), homoerotic (sexual) relations were more complex. Male same-sex erotic relations were viewed as a matter of power and dominance of one male over another. These acts were considered acceptable when the two parties were not of the same social status. However, in the cases of A18–20, the active participants were clearly of the same social order.

A21–30

This section continues a discussion of female interactions in both the public and the private spheres. Marriage did not simply take place between a consenting man and woman but was negotiated by the heads of the two families. The father's consent for the woman was mandatory, even if she was under control of a creditor (A48). Other Middle Assyrian texts, however, show evidence that couples were able to conduct marriages if there were no guardians. Terms for the marriage arrangements varied depending upon the stage of the negotiations, which sometimes took years to conclude. The bridewealth (A38) was a gift of nonconsumable items (often precious metals) given to the father of the bride. The bridal gift (A30) was a gift of consumable items (food or animals). A contract was required for the completion of the marriage, as was a betrothal meal (A42–43). Even after the contract, gifts, and betrothal, a daughter could still live in her parents' house until the time of cohabitation with her husband (A25–27, A32–33, and A38).

A31–40

If a widow had neither sons nor a son-in-law to support her, she could be declared legally independent (A33 and A46). She was free to remain independent or to remarry outside her husband's family. If the independent widow lived in another man's house for two years, she was able to take on the status of wife (A34). According to the few marriage contracts that have been uncovered from the Middle Assyrian period, it appears that men and women had an equal right to divorce a spouse. A37 makes it clear, however, that a man could divorce his wife without cause and did not have to pay her compensation. On the other hand, he could not take back the bridewealth (A38). Furthermore, a marriage could be dissolved if the husband was gone for an extended period of time (five years in the case of A36) or if the wife had no means of support. The type of priestess mentioned in A40 (qadiltu) was allowed to marry but then had an obligation to be veiled. Because the qadiltu was often mentioned in conjunction with midwives, it has been assumed that such women may have participated in washing or purification rituals concerning women and birth.

A41–50

Nothing is known about how judges were trained or on what their qualifications were based. They were able to investigate the status of widows (A45), they could legislate in land ownership decisions (B6 and B17–18), and they had jurisdiction over criminal matters. Evidently, they dealt with both secular and religious matters. Polygamy was allowed under certain circumstances. A46 implies that a man was able to take a second wife, presumably to secure a male descendant. He also was required to take a second wife in the case of the death of his brother-in-law (as per A30). There is no evidence, however, of polyandry (the practice of having more than one husband). The woman of the a'ilu class mentioned in A42–43 probably refers to an unmarried girl under her father's authority or a daughter-in-law living with her husband in her father-in-law's house. Thus she does not appear to have had the same status as a wife of the head of the household.

A51–59

Although a prostitute had low social standing, she was legally protected in the case of harm done to her that caused a miscarriage (A52). The custom of infant exposure in ancient Assyria is poorly documented. Children were exposed (that is, left for the gods to decide their fate) for a variety of reasons. A child might be exposed if the family was too poor to take care of the child and no relatives were able or willing to help or if the child was born with a physical abnormality, which was viewed as a bad omen for the household. It has been presumed that female infants were exposed more often than male infants, but there is no concrete evidence to support this theory. In the case of A53, a woman who aborted her fetus was guilty of a capital crime. It is presumed that her husband would determine the fate of the infant (but only after its birth). Forced abortion, even of a prostitute's fetus, was considered a capital crime (A52).

Rape of a virgin was punishable by marriage, if the father of the victim was agreeable (A55). The father received “triple” the amount of silver from the perpetrator, whether or not he was required to marry the victim. Perhaps unique among the Middle Assyrian Laws is the edict concerning a husband's right to punish his wife in a corporal manner, which included mutilation (A59). Since the previous two laws (A57–58) are heavily fragmented and deal with a similar subject, it is difficult to understand the context of law A59. From what can be understood, it appears that the husband had the right to perform only what was written on the “tablet,” perhaps implying a judicial decree. One can also assume that punishment was carried out in the presence of judicial administrators.

B1–10

There are numerous contracts from ancient Mesopotamia concerning inheritance issues. In the Middle Assyrian Laws, heirs were evidently ranked (sons and then brothers of the deceased, according to A25). A murderer or a traitor, however, lost his inheritance (and his life), and the victim's next of kin (in the case of murder) received his inheritance (B2–3). A man could also lose an inheritance if he participated in a harvest without cultivating his share of the land (B4).

B11–20

Encroachment on someone else's property is a common theme in the Middle Assyrian Laws (as in B12–15). If a man planted an orchard, raised trees, dug a well, or even made bricks on the plot of land that was owned by another, he was required to compensate the owner with a like field, if the owner did not object. If the owner did object, the perpetrator was required to triple the compensation, suffer fifty blows with rods, and perform an unspecified community service (B14–15).