Skip to main content

Lex Talionis

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Law and Economics
  • 58 Accesses

Definition

The classical formulation of the view that the guilty must be punished in exact proportionate to their crimes: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

The lex talionis is otherwise known as the view that punishment for crimes must exact “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” It dates at least to the law of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi, and the general idea is cited in modern times by both scholars and laypeople in support of punishment that “fits the crime.” The lex talionis is sometimes used as a justification of retributivist punishment, which requires that the guilty receive their due punishment as a matter of right or justice, although it is less of a justification and more of a statement of the proper target of punishment (the guilty) and degree of punishment (proportionality).

The lex talionisis cited by key retributivists, including its leading proponent, Immanuel Kant, who asked “what kind and what amount of punishment is it that public justice makes its...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 819.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,099.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Becker GS (1968) Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J Polit Econ 76:169–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackstone W (1765–1769) Commentaries on the law of England. Clarendon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks T (2012) Punishment. Routledge, Abingdon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill MT (2007) Real retributivism. Wash Univ Law Rev 85:815–870

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis M (1983) How to make the punishment fit the crime. Ethics 93:726–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis M (1986) Harm and retribution. Philos Public Aff 15:246–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtman S (2009) Justice, mercy, and efficiency. In: White MD (ed) Theoretical foundations of law and economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 119–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant I (1797) The metaphysics of morals (trans: Gregor M). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996 edn)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick R (1981) Philosophical explanations. Belknap, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark D. White .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

White, M.D. (2019). Lex Talionis. In: Marciano, A., Ramello, G.B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics