Özet:

For the various crimes defined by law in the Mezopotamia geography, the civilizations that lived in that geography have applied different punishments. But the civilizations in the geography of Mesopotamia in general have applied to the River Judgment in order to ensure the appearance of a criminal in some similar crimes. The Mezopotamian communities who appealed for this trial were subjected to different punishments depending on the conclusion that came out of the trial. For example, a man accused of magic in the Ur-Nammu law was brought to the river and was judged. The person who accused him of getting out of the river during the trial paid three shells of silver. The law of Hammurabi is also applied to this practice, but this law has not been treated as goodwill as the law of Ur-Nammu. According to the Hammurabi law, the man who accused him of witch and the guilty would go to the river trial. If the convicted person survives without trial, the convicted person will be killed and the property will be left to the person he accused. The river judgment was a system used in Mesopotamia in the Old, Middle and New Century periods. The purpose of this system was to reveal that the person accused for a crime that would require river trial is innocent or guilty. This study will give an example of how judgment is applied by action from the second article which makes judgment necessary in the Hammurabi (Old Babylon) law, and from the two cities where the river judgment is carried out in Mesopotamia. In addition, in some articles of the Hammurabi law, as in the case of zina, it will be discussed in this study that a person is caught during zina as a result of being thrown to the river directly to be executed.

Anahtar Kelimeler: