Lecture 5 - The Empire of Hammurabi

 In the grand scheme of life, if there is one, what does Hammurabi matter? He's remembered for his Code of Law though he wasn't the first to have these as laws; otherwise, he's yet another man who conquered a large section of land and people, then died. He's the first I've heard of that conquered and then stopped, seemingly satisfied. He claimed to have warred at the command of his gods, then he settled in to micromanage the empire he had established.
Dise says that after Hammurabi's death, his empire swiftly collapsed but the end is noted as 1595 B.C. and Hammurabi died way back in 1750 B.C. One hundred and fifty-five years doesn't sound all that swift to me. It sounds more like a slow collapse, a crumbling away over time.
Hammurabi didn't establish an imperial system, he made "all" decisions personally. Hard to imagine running an empire like that but apparently he did. If that was the weakness of his empire, why was the intricate imperial system of Shulgi's Third Dynasty Ur a weakness? Which is weak, an imperial system or no imperial system? Is it just that these rules were both dependent in one way or another and not flexible, adaptable to changing circumstances?
Is America's government adaptable? Is there a weakness that we should see? What is it the Bible says, something about 'in a multitude of counselors, there is wisdom'? At times, this leads to confusion but I can see that having many viewpoints and considerations available is wise. Those whose advice is discounted or at least deemed inadvisable at the time to follow, will likely prepare for when everything falls apart because their advice was ignored. Then, if things DO fall apart, they have a plan ready. If things DON'T fall apart, they may be embarassed but at least glad things worked out (depending on their levels of arrogance, of course).
Perhaps the situations in these empires is far too different from America in modern times, where the entire world is involved. But these people seemed to think it was the entire world, they didn't necessarily know about the other continents so well and they weren't a necessary consideration. Isn't it like all the states of America considering themselves as part of the whole of America? There are still rebellions and uprisings, I think they're just not looked at quite the same way. Why not? Or are they?


Quizlet link and password: Empire of Hammurabi and use: hambablec5