<!-- factbase:5a1717 -->
# Code of Ur-Nammu

# Code of Ur-Nammu

## Overview
The Code of Ur-Nammu (~2100–2050 BCE) is the oldest known legal code, predating the Code of Hammurabi by ~300 years. It was issued by Ur-Nammu (or his son Shulgi) of the Third Dynasty of Ur.

## Key Facts
- Date: ~2100–2050 BCE
- Issuer: Ur-Nammu or Shulgi, Third Dynasty of Ur
- Language: Sumerian
- Discovered: Fragments found at Nippur and Ur

## Content
- Prologue establishes the king as agent of divine justice
- ~30 surviving laws (originally more)
- Covers: Bodily injury, robbery, sexual offenses, marriage, slavery, agricultural disputes
- Uses monetary compensation (fines) rather than *lex talionis* ("eye for an eye") [^1]

## Significance
- Oldest known legal code, predating Hammurabi by ~300 years
- Shows that Sumerian legal tradition favored fines over physical punishment
- Demonstrates sophisticated legal thinking in the 3rd millennium BCE [^2]

---
[^1]: Roth, M.T. *Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor* (1997)
[^2]: Kramer, S.N. "Ur-Nammu Law Code" *Orientalia* 23 (1954)
---

## Review Queue

<!-- factbase:review -->
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 10: "Date: ~2100–2050 BCE" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 11: "Issuer: Ur-Nammu or Shulgi, Third Dynasty of Ur" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 12: "Language: Sumerian" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 13: "Discovered: Fragments found at Nippur and Ur" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 16: "Prologue establishes the king as agent of divine justice" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 17: "~30 surviving laws (originally more)" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 18: "Covers: Bodily injury, robbery, sexual offenses, marriage, slavery, agricultu..." - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 19: "Uses monetary compensation (fines) rather than *lex talionis* ("eye for an ey..." - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 22: "Oldest known legal code, predating Hammurabi by ~300 years" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 23: "Shows that Sumerian legal tradition favored fines over physical punishment" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[temporal]` Line 24: "Demonstrates sophisticated legal thinking in the 3rd millennium BCE [^2]" - when was this true?
> Static historical fact. No temporal tag needed.
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 10: "Date: ~2100–2050 BCE" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 11: "Issuer: Ur-Nammu or Shulgi, Third Dynasty of Ur" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 12: "Language: Sumerian" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 13: "Discovered: Fragments found at Nippur and Ur" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 16: "Prologue establishes the king as agent of divine justice" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 17: "~30 surviving laws (originally more)" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 18: "Covers: Bodily injury, robbery, sexual offenses, marriage, slavery, agricultu..." - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 22: "Oldest known legal code, predating Hammurabi by ~300 years" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[missing]` Line 23: "Shows that Sumerian legal tradition favored fines over physical punishment" - what is the source?
> Roth (1997) [^1], Kramer (1954) [^2]
- [x] `@q[stale]` Line 19: "Uses monetary compensation (fines) rather than *lex talionis* ("eye for an ey..." - Roth source from 1997 may be outdated, is this still accurate?
> Scholarship remains current. Roth's work on ancient law codes is still authoritative.
- [x] `@q[stale]` Line 24: "Demonstrates sophisticated legal thinking in the 3rd millennium BCE [^2]" - Kramer source from 1954 may be outdated, is this still accurate?
> Scholarship remains current. Kramer's foundational work on Sumerian law is still cited.