The paper makes the case for Italian (It.) piccolo ‘small’, Spanish (Sp.) pequeño ‘id.’, and several other Romance and Latin formations as reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root *pei̯ḱ- ‘cut (off)’, by means of a twofold historical-comparative approach combining Romance Linguistics and Indo-European Linguistics. (1) The family of It. piccolo may be traced back to two Proto-Romance (PRom.) variants *pīk-u and *pĭkk-u, the regular outcome and the “littera Rule” outcome, respectively, of Latin (Lat.) *pīc-us ‘small, little’, among whose direct reflexes are: - Portuguese (Port.) peco ‘stunted, dumb, imbecile’ (*pĭkk-u), cf. parvo ‘idiot’ (: Lat. parvus ‘small’); - Rumenian pic ‘drop, small quantity’ (*pīk-u), Sicilian (Sic.) picca ‘small quantity, a little’ (*pĭkk-a), and Megleno-Rumenian pică ‘id.’ (*pīk-a), which reflect the use of the Lat. neuter nom.-acc. sg. *pīc-um or pl. *pīc-a as a substantive or adverb meaning ‘a little’, cf. e.g. paulum ‘id.’ (neut. nom.-acc. sg. of paulus ‘small’). (2) The suffixed derivatives of this lexical family reflect more recent formations built by means of various diminuitive suffixes: - It. picc-olo is a reflex with post-tonic gemination of *pìc-olo (attesting a reflex of the Latin suffix -ulus), from *pic-o (PRom. *pīk-u). - Sp. pequ-eño, Port. pequ-eno, and Old Logudorese Sardinian pik-innu (all attesting reflexes of the Latin suffix -innus) must be traced back to PRom. *pĭkku (Sp. *peco and Port. peco) and *pīk-u (Sardinian), respectively. - It. pìcci-olo and picc-ino and Sic. picci-ottu and picc-iriddu may attest a spread of the palatalized outcome expected in e.g. It. picc-ino; alternatively, they may reflect further PRom. variants, i.e. *pīk-i̯u and *pĭkk-i̯u. (3) Lat. *pīcus ‘small, little’ is in turn the reflex of *pei̯ḱ-ó-, a CeC-ó- derivative of PIE *pei̯ḱ- ‘cut, carve, fashion, adorn’ with two possible meanings, namely a passive ‘who/that is cut, carved, fashioned, adorned’ and an agentive ‘who/that cuts, carves, fashions, adorns’. The meaning ‘small’ developed from the passive meaning; this semantic development has parallels in both Romance and Indo-European languages, cf. e.g. Italian corto < Latin curtus ‘shortened, mutilated, short’ < PIE *kr̥-tó- ‘who/that is cut, cropped’. The agentive meaning underlies three further formations, namely: - the Lat. theonym Pīcus (*‘[god] who fashions [objects]’), name of a mythical smith; - the Lat. bird-name pīcus ‘woodpecker’ (*‘[bird] that carves [trees]’); - the Ancient Greek adjective πεικός /peikós/ ‘sharp, stinging, bitter’ (*‘who/that cuts, stings’).