What is so striking is that the Twelve Tables were said to have been produced by men for men, through scholarship and cooperation. And while Livy and many other date the origin of the Twelve Tables to the 5th century BCE, our earliest record of them dates to the second century.
Livy's account places great emphasis on the fact that Roman law was created by "common men".
The ambassadors had now returned with the Athenian laws; the tribunes pressed the more urgently, that a commencement should at length be made of compiling the laws. It was resolved that decemvirs should be elected without appeal, and that there should be no other magistrate during that year. There was, for a considerable time, a dispute whether plebeians should be admitted among them: at length the point was given up to the patricians, provided that the Icilian law regarding the Aventine and the other devoting laws were not repealed.
In the three hundred and first year after Rome was built, the form of the government was a second time changed, the supreme power being transferred from consuls to decemvirs, as it had passed before from kings to consuls. The change was less remarkable, because not of long duration; for the joyous commencement of that government became too licentious. So much the sooner did the matter fall, and (the usage) was recurred to, that the name and authority of consuls was committed to two persons. The decemvirs appointed were, Appius Claudius, Titus Genucius, Publius Sestius, Lucius Veturius, Caius Julius, Aulus Manlius, Servius Sulpicius, Publius Curiatius, Titus Romilius, Spurius Postumius. On Claudius and Genucius, because they had been elected consuls for that year, the honour was conferred in compensation for the honour (of the consulate); and on Sestius, one of the consuls of the former year, because he had proposed that matter to the senate against the will of his colleague. Next to these were considered the three ambassadors who had gone to Athens; at the same time that the honour might serve as a recompence for so distant an embassy; at the same time they considered that persons acquainted with the foreign laws would be of use in digesting the new code of regulations. Other persons made up the number. They say that persons advanced in years were appointed by the last suffrages, in order that they might oppose with less warmth the opinions of others. The direction of the entire government was rested in Appius through the favour of the commons, and he had assumed a demeanour so new, that from a severe and harsh reviler of the people, he became suddenly a protector of the commons, and a candidate for popular favour. They administered justice to the people one every tenth day. On that day the twelve fasces attended the præfect of justice; one beadle attended each of his nine colleagues, and in the singular harmony among themselves, which unanimity might sometimes prove prejudicial to private persons, the strictest equity was shown to others. It will suffice to adduce a proof of their moderation by instancing one matter. Though they had been appointed without (the privilege of) appeal, yet a dead body having been found buried in the house of Publius Sestius, a man of patrician rank, and this having been brought forward in an assembly, in a matter equally clear and atrocious, Caius Julius, a decemvir, appointed a day of trial for Sestius, and appeared before the people as prosecutor (in a matter) of which he was legally a judge; and relinquished his right, so that he might add what had been taken from the power of the office to the liberty of the people.
Whilst the highest and lowest alike experienced from them this prompt administration of justice, impartial, as if from an oracle, then their attention was devoted to the framing of laws; and the ten tables being proposed amid the intense expectation of all, they summoned the people to an assembly: and "what may prove favourable, advantageous, and happy to the commonwealth themselves, and to their children, ordered them to go and read the laws that were exhibited." "That they had equalized the rights of all, both the highest and the lowest, as far as could be devised by the abilities of ten men; that the understanding and counsels of a greater number might prove more successful; that they should turn in their minds each particular within themselves, canvass it in conversation; and bring together under public discussion whatever might seem an excess or deficiency under each particular. That the Roman people should have such laws, as the general consent might appear not so much to have ratified when proposed, as to have proposed from themselves." When they appeared sufficiently corrected according to public opinion (as expressed) regarding each chapter of the laws as it was published, the laws of the ten tables were passed at the assembly voting by centuries; which, even at the present time, amid this immense heap of laws crowded one upon the other, still remain the source of all public and private jurisprudence. A rumour was then spread that two tables were wanting; on the addition of which a body, as it were, of the whole Roman law might be completed.
In the three hundred and first year after Rome was built, the form of the government was a second time changed, the supreme power being transferred from consuls to decemvirs, as it had passed before from kings to consuls. The change was less remarkable, because not of long duration; for the joyous commencement of that government became too licentious. So much the sooner did the matter fall, and (the usage) was recurred to, that the name and authority of consuls was committed to two persons. The decemvirs appointed were, Appius Claudius, Titus Genucius, Publius Sestius, Lucius Veturius, Caius Julius, Aulus Manlius, Servius Sulpicius, Publius Curiatius, Titus Romilius, Spurius Postumius. On Claudius and Genucius, because they had been elected consuls for that year, the honour was conferred in compensation for the honour (of the consulate); and on Sestius, one of the consuls of the former year, because he had proposed that matter to the senate against the will of his colleague. Next to these were considered the three ambassadors who had gone to Athens; at the same time that the honour might serve as a recompence for so distant an embassy; at the same time they considered that persons acquainted with the foreign laws would be of use in digesting the new code of regulations. Other persons made up the number. They say that persons advanced in years were appointed by the last suffrages, in order that they might oppose with less warmth the opinions of others. The direction of the entire government was rested in Appius through the favour of the commons, and he had assumed a demeanour so new, that from a severe and harsh reviler of the people, he became suddenly a protector of the commons, and a candidate for popular favour. They administered justice to the people one every tenth day. On that day the twelve fasces attended the præfect of justice; one beadle attended each of his nine colleagues, and in the singular harmony among themselves, which unanimity might sometimes prove prejudicial to private persons, the strictest equity was shown to others. It will suffice to adduce a proof of their moderation by instancing one matter. Though they had been appointed without (the privilege of) appeal, yet a dead body having been found buried in the house of Publius Sestius, a man of patrician rank, and this having been brought forward in an assembly, in a matter equally clear and atrocious, Caius Julius, a decemvir, appointed a day of trial for Sestius, and appeared before the people as prosecutor (in a matter) of which he was legally a judge; and relinquished his right, so that he might add what had been taken from the power of the office to the liberty of the people.
Whilst the highest and lowest alike experienced from them this prompt administration of justice, impartial, as if from an oracle, then their attention was devoted to the framing of laws; and the ten tables being proposed amid the intense expectation of all, they summoned the people to an assembly: and "what may prove favourable, advantageous, and happy to the commonwealth themselves, and to their children, ordered them to go and read the laws that were exhibited." "That they had equalized the rights of all, both the highest and the lowest, as far as could be devised by the abilities of ten men; that the understanding and counsels of a greater number might prove more successful; that they should turn in their minds each particular within themselves, canvass it in conversation; and bring together under public discussion whatever might seem an excess or deficiency under each particular. That the Roman people should have such laws, as the general consent might appear not so much to have ratified when proposed, as to have proposed from themselves." When they appeared sufficiently corrected according to public opinion (as expressed) regarding each chapter of the laws as it was published, the laws of the ten tables were passed at the assembly voting by centuries; which, even at the present time, amid this immense heap of laws crowded one upon the other, still remain the source of all public and private jurisprudence. A rumour was then spread that two tables were wanting; on the addition of which a body, as it were, of the whole Roman law might be completed.
Now it strikes me that the account of the origins of Jewish law appears in many ways to be in direct contrast to the account of the origins of Roman law.
The divine origin of Jewish law seems to be emphasized in contrast to the Roman account. It could also be that it is emphasized in contrast to the understanding of Greek law as well. Of course Greek law was seen as having been produced or handed down from law-givers from the 7th century.
But to me, the account in Exodus of Moses handing down divine law seems to be in direct and intentional contrast to the widely known accounts and practices of the establishment of law codes through secular means.