PARRICIDE. — In common usage, the term denotes the killing of a father or even the killing of a son by the father. In penal law, it refers to the killing of a relative (as well as a lineal in-law) and is distinguished between proper and improper (or quasi-) parricide, depending on whether the victim is a lineal relative or not. The Italian Penal Code contains no trace of the term.
The etymology of the word is highly uncertain, although it is commonly believed to derive from *patricidium*, i.e., the killing of a *pater familias*. The question has been especially examined by Romanist scholarship, with particular reference to a passage contained in a law of Numa Pompilius ("*si qui hominem liberum dolo sciens morti duit, paricidas esto*"). In the absence of further clarification, the expression *paricidas esto*, which summarized the sanction of the aforementioned provision, has been subject to various interpretations: some have understood it to mean that the killer of a free man was equated with the killer of a *pater familias* (and thus the etymology of the word *parricide* would be explained in the simplest way); for others, however, the formula implied that the killer of a free man was to be killed *par occisum*, i.e., in the same manner, which naturally entails a quite different etymological solution. Nor have other singular explanations been lacking. It has been said that *paricidas* was the avenger, i.e., the one who killed a person in the same way (*par*) in which that person had killed another. Finally, *paricidium* has been derived from *per caedere*. Nor has the figure of the *quaestores paricidii* helped to clarify the problem, given the many doubts surrounding their institution. In any case, in due course, *paricidium* came to signify in Roman law the killing of a kinsman, and this remained the broad sense of the term thereafter.
Differences between eras and peoples concern essentially the extension of the concept of kinsman and the punishment imposed on the parricide. In the Roman law of the historical period, parricide consisted in the killing of a descendant, an ascendant, a spouse, a brother, an uncle, a cousin, close in-laws, or a patron. The typical punishment was the sack (*cullus*): the culprit was placed inside it with an animal and then thrown into the sea. In the 1st century BCE, the *lex Pompeia de paricidio* significantly altered the regulation of parricide; among other things, it replaced the death penalty with exile. However, the *cullus* is found again in the 1st century of the Empire, first for the sole case of killing an ascendant, then for the killing of any close kinsman. Subsequently, it was replaced by *expositio ad bestias* and burning at the stake. As is also evident from barbarian and later legislation, the death penalty thus became the normal sanction for parricide. Naturally, the death penalty was replaced by life imprisonment in those legal systems that, from the 18th century onward, abolished capital punishment. At the same time, there arose a tendency to restrict the scope of parricide to the killing of an ascendant or descendant.
In the Zanardelli Code, the killing of a legitimate ascendant or descendant was indeed punished with life imprisonment, as was the killing of a natural parent or child when the natural filiation had been legally recognized or declared (art. 366). The killing of a spouse, brother, sister, adopter, adoptee, or lineal in-law was also aggravated compared to common homicide; in such cases, imprisonment from 22 to 24 years was applicable (art. 365). In relation to this dual treatment, the terms proper and improper parricide were used, respectively. Since the Rocco Code reproduced the Zanardelli system in more or less the same terms, the distinction between proper and improper parricide continued to be made. The former occurs in the case provided for by art. 577 no. 1, i.e., the killing of an ascendant or descendant (punishment: life imprisonment); the latter occurs in the case provided for by the second paragraph of art. 577, i.e., the killing of a spouse (where spouse means one united by a civilly valid marriage), a brother or sister (including full, consanguineous, and uterine siblings), an adopter, an adoptee, or a lineal in-law (punishment: imprisonment from 24 to 30 years). As can be seen, apart from the greater severity of the latter penalty, current legislation differs from the previous one only in that it has equated illegitimate filiation with legitimate filiation in accordance with the penal principle established by art. 540; art. 577 no. 1 indeed provides for life imprisonment for the killing of an ascendant or descendant in general. Thus, the killing of a son or father falls within this provision, whether the filiation is legitimate, natural, or adult, and in no way is it diminished.
Another important difference from the Zanardelli Code has since been abolished by the Royal Legislative Decree of 8 August 1944, no. 244, which abolished the death penalty: art. 576 indeed punished with death the killing of an ascendant or descendant when it occurred in two situations: namely, for a base or trivial motive, or with the use of torture, or by employing a venomous or other insidious means, or with premeditation. Now, even in these cases, life imprisonment applies.
What is most important to note is that the relationship of kinship is considered by the Italian legislator as an aggravating circumstance of common homicide and not as a qualified form of homicide, as is the case, for example, with infanticide for reasons of honor, killing at the victim’s request, honor-based homicide, or preterintentional homicide. According to art. 60, the aggravating circumstance must not be applied when the killer acted in ignorance of the kinship relationship with the victim; in such a case, there is in fact an error regarding the identity of the person.
With regard to canon law, parricide is considered a qualified form of homicide (v.). Cf. the entry cited for its status as a *delictum mixti fori* and for the penalties.