Because Justinian attempted to keep portions of the Mosaic law because of his own Christianity, Hammurabi's code, which influenced Mosaic law, continued to influence the legal system of cultures even into the Christian era. All three laws legislated both public and private life, including sexual life and family relations, and prescribed death as a punishment for a variety of crimes, including adultery (Norsoto). One major difference between the laws of Hammurabi, Moses, and Justinian was the "eye for an eye" concept of revenge. While this legal concept was prominent throughout Hammurabi's law, and clearly influenced concepts with the same premise in Moses' law, Justinian generally showed more compassion through sentencing, and did not include the concept in his code. Similarly, while Hammurabi's code often issued the sentence of death, and Moses' code followed suit, or at least prescribed bodily harm, the Justinian law instituted a more formal system of judges and jury in determining one's guilt, and sentences were often lenient for the first offense (Nosotro). Thus, Hammurabi's code can presently be seen in the evolution of legal systems of the cultures around him. Both the law itself, and the act of writing down the law, which can also be seen in Mosaic Law, have been passed down throughout generations and cultures because of Hammurabi's original decision. Although Hammurabi's code directly impacted the evolution of law and legal systems in Mesopotamia and the surrounding cultures, his influence has not been restricted to that particular geographical area. Instead, Hammurabi's code and act of formalizing the code through writing can be traced to the legal systems of today. Some suggest that the act of writing the code was the first implementation of human rights, a label others reserve for the Magna Carta, which would not arrive for several hundreds of years. Although it may be hard to grasp how a code that includes prescriptions of death for those who commit crimes such as having sex with a person to whom they are not wed can be considered a champion of human...

As has already been examined, the culture of the area viewed women and certain classes differently; all people were not "created equal" in Mesopotamian culture. For this reason, the law actually did protect the rights of women and the lower classes by formalizing what rights they did have, making it harder for those in authority positions to exploit these people. Because, in general, the chronological development of legal systems after Hammurabi wrote the code began to become more lenient and more focused on protecting the rights of the oppressed, some suggest that Hammurabi became a pioneer who launched a path of human rights and social justice that continued to grow until our modern era. In fact, the study of Hammurabi's code is an excellent example of history's expansion to include history's implications for women, minorities, and others who have been routinely forgotten by history in the past (Ralph 3-4).
Whether Hammurabi was the father of human rights or simply a wise king who wanted to show the universal applicability of the law by formalizing it, none can argue that the king did not make a monumental contribution to history with the stone slab containing his code. An understanding of the code's impact on Mesopotamia, surrounding cultures, and modern legal systems and law suggests that the code allowed for the evolution of both legal studies and human rights.

Feldbrugge, Ferdinad. The Law's Beginnings. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers.

Nosotro, Rit. "Comparing the content of Hammurabi's Code, Mosaic Law, and Justinian

Law." Hyper History. 2008. 3 July 2008 http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw03hammurabijustinlaw.htm.

Ralph, Philip Lee. World Civilizations. Kingston: R.S. Means, 1997.

Theological Implications of Hammurabi's Code, Mosaic Law, and Justinian's Law."

Hyper History. 2008. 3 July 2008. http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw03hammurabijustintheo.htm