Definition
At common law, assassination is a form of murder distinguished by the manner or motive of its commission. Historical legal sources converge on two overlapping conceptions:
(1) Murder committed for hire — a killing carried out by a third party at another's instigation, without the killer having personal provocation or grievance against the victim.
(2) Murder committed by treachery, stealth, or surprise — a killing accomplished by lying in wait, secret assault, or sudden violence that denies the victim any opportunity for defense.
Modern criminal law does not treat assassination as a distinct statutory offense in most jurisdictions. The conduct it describes is charged as murder, with hire-based killings typically prosecuted as first-degree murder or under solicitation and conspiracy statutes. In federal law, the assassination of specified government officials — including the President — is a distinct federal crime carrying mandatory penalties.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): The murder of a person, especially for political reasons or for personal gain.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): The act of assassinating; a killing by treacherous violence.
The legal gap matters in two directions. First, the political connotation now dominant in common usage — killing a public figure for ideological or political ends — was not the emphasis of classical legal definitions, which centered on hire and treachery rather than the victim's status or the killer's motive. Second, the common usage treats assassination as a category defined by who is killed; the legal tradition defined it by how and why the killing was arranged. A researcher relying on modern intuition may misread historical legal sources that apply the term to purely private hired killings.
---
Common Confusion
Assassination is frequently conflated with murder-for-hire (solicitation to commit murder) and with the broader category of premeditated murder. The distinction historical sources draw is meaningful: assassination required both treachery in execution and, in the dominant formulation, the absence of personal resentment on the killer's part — the killer acts as an instrument, not as an aggrieved party. This separates it conceptually from a duel killing, a crime of passion, or even a premeditated revenge killing, none of which qualified as assassination in the classical legal sense.
Do not conflate assassination with tyrannicide, which historical political and legal philosophy treated as a separate question entirely, particularly in the context of natural law doctrine.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Assassination sits at an unstable boundary between criminal law doctrine and political-historical discourse, and the two literatures do not use the term consistently. Researchers should be alert to several navigational issues:
Historical legal sources define assassination as a technical subcategory of murder with emphasis on hire and treachery — not on the victim's political importance. When reading 18th- and 19th-century criminal law treatises, the term signals a specific aggravating configuration, not merely any high-profile killing.
Modern legal materials — particularly federal statutes, national security law, and international humanitarian law — have partially rehabilitated assassination as a legal term of art, but in a different register. Executive Order 12333 (1976, as amended) prohibits U.S. government personnel from engaging in assassination, using the term in its political-target sense. This is a different legal context than common law homicide doctrine, and conflating the two creates serious analytical errors.
International humanitarian law distinguishes assassination from lawful targeted killing in armed conflict. This body of law — developed well after the classical dictionary sources — is absent from the historical dictionaries entirely. Researchers working in national security or laws-of-war contexts must supplement historical sources with treaty law, customary international law sources, and contemporary commentary.
The Erskine Institute citation (Ersk. Inst. 4, 4, 45) appears across multiple historical dictionaries as the primary authority. This is a reference to John Erskine's Institutes of the Law of Scotland. Its repeated appearance signals that the legal definition of assassination as a technical term was primarily developed in Scots law; English and American common law borrowed the formulation rather than generating independent doctrine.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
The five historical sources are in strong agreement on the core elements: murder for hire, treachery, stealth, and the absence of personal provocation. Black's (both editions) and Bouvier's reproduce nearly identical language tracing to Erskine. Burrill adds Webster's formulation — murder by surprise or secret assault — which shifts slightly toward manner and away from motive, reflecting the dual character the term carried.
Rapalje & Lawrence, despite a partially corrupted entry in available sources, confirms the same two poles: murder for hire and treacherous killing from ambush or sudden surprise.
None of the historical dictionaries addresses the political dimension that now dominates common usage. None addresses federal statutory treatment, international law, or state-sponsored killing. The Erskine citation is the historical anchor across sources, but it represents Scots institutional law — researchers should not assume the formulation translates without friction into English common law or American statutory contexts.
Burrill's brief note on ASSATH, appearing immediately after the assassination entry in the original text, is not related; it is a separate Welsh purgation custom and an artifact of alphabetical proximity.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The United States federalizes assassination of the President, President-elect, Vice President, and certain other officials under 18 U.S.C. § 1751 and related provisions. Most state murder statutes subsume assassination conduct under first-degree murder or murder-for-hire provisions without using the term. In international law, the prohibition on assassination operates as a norm of customary international law and through instruments such as Executive Order 12333, with ongoing legal debate about its application to targeted killing operations.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia — Homicide (for common law murder classification and aggravating circumstances)
See Law Mind Encyclopedia — Political Violence and the Law (for the modern political-target sense and federal statutory treatment)
---