In this paper, I will discuss the similarities and differences between the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Code of Hammurabi. One thing that they have in common is both are talking about the king of their kingdom and how influential they are. Secondly, both talk about their kings building temples to different Gods. The third thing they have in common is that they take place in major states of the earlier time periods. They differ in the fact that they were written 800 years apart and the kings had very different leadership styles. These two kings were obviously very influential in their respective kingdoms, with King Hammurabi being the King of Babylon and King Gilgamesh being the King of Uruk. Gilgamesh is apparently an earlier ruler than Hammurabi, but they both had done magnificent accomplishments for their respective kingdoms while they were in power. It is interesting, though, that the biography of Hammurabi portrays Hammurabi as one of the greatest rulers of the ancient times with very positive reviews from its people. However, in the Epic of Gilgamesh, many of Uruk’s residents wanted Gilgamesh to leave them alone, that he wasn’t being a very good king, and that the city-state would be better off without his oppressive and tyrannical rule. And so, we can see that …show more content…
It gave out definite rules and regulations, and even though he helped to conquer Elam and Larsa, he became favorable to the people by also getting rid of their debt and using the same laws to govern. In addition, Hammurabi was also very accomplished by uniting the city-states into one coherent, united kingdom. Although, we cannot forget to realize that Gilgamesh and Hammurabi ruled eight-hundred years apart from each other, and thus, Hammurabi was the actual pioneer who helped to start these