TLDR: earlier than Hammurabi's eye-for-an-eye justice was Urukagina, who presented himself as a savior for the people, including getting them out of debt and pr

TLDR: earlier than Hammurabi's eye-for-an-eye justice was Urukagina, who presented himself as a savior for the people, including getting them out of debt and protecting them from corrupt officials. (But OP is most excellent and worth reading.) It reminded me of Solon's changes in Athens, to broker some fairness, wipe prior debts and outlaw debtor's prisons, require military service (paid for the lower classes), and of course opening decisions beyond to hereditary aristocrats (land owners) to those with wealth (traders). In both cases, leaders seemed to be responding to stasis borne of economic oppression. However, ideology is not evidence of justice; both Putin and Xi present themselves as champions of the people against the corrupt bureaucracy (and discipline their governments via discretionary application of high standards). But the brutality of eye-for-an-eye might obscure the point: Hammurabi seems to be distinct in not associating power with the person, but establishing settled expectations so people could sort out their differences directly (freeing the leader from the no-win situation of judging disputes). That makes it easier for the laws to continue largely the same, regardless of the style of government (much as we in the US and EU still apply English and Roman law). It's a shame our sampling of ancient governance is limited to stone and clay tablets from the middle east. There's evidence of other societies of a similar sophistication but without the hierarchical dependence on gods and beer.