Many discussions arose as to the meaning of particular sections. Thus C
F. LEHMANN(-HAUPT) wrote in _Klio_, vol. iii, pp. 32-41 (1904), on _Ein
missverstandenes Gesetz Hammurabis_, which was also taken as the title
of an article by F. E. PEISER in _Orientalistische Litteraturzeitung_,
vol. vii, cols. 236-7 (1904). Neither of these scholars can be said to
have quite settled the questions they had raised; but the subject of §§
185-93 was greatly cleared by their thoughtful treatment.
In 1908 M. SCHORR contributed to the _Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde
des Morgenlandes_, vol. xxii, pp. 385-92, an article on _Die §§ 280-282
des Gesetzbuches Hammurabis_, followed, pp. 393-8, by an article of D.
H. MÜLLER on _Die §§ 280-282 des Kodex Hammurabis_.
M. SCHORR in 1906 had written in the same journal, vol. xx, pp. 119-23,
an article _Zum § 27 des Hammurabi-Gesetzes_, and in the _Vienna
Oriental Journal_, xx (1906), pp. 314-36, _Der § 7 des
Hammurabi-Gesetzes_.
BR. MEISSNER has discussed the correct word for a builder in the Code in
the _Orientalistische Litteraturzeitung_, vol. xv, cols. 38-59 (1912),
under the title _Zu Hammurapis Gesetz_, xix, R. 93.
_Die Lücke in der Gesetzes-Stele Hammurapis_, by A. UNGNAD, in the
_Beiträge zur Assyriologie_, vi, Heft 5, discussed all the means known
to fill the gap as existing in the text, but the new sources named on p.
66 above will very likely suffice to complete the text.