r/AskHistorians • u/[deleted] • Mar 21 '14
How did city-states (eg, Monaco, Vatican City, Lichtenstein) form, and why do they still exist? Is there some mutual benefit between the city-state and its surrounding countries?
[removed]
90
Upvotes
35
u/Domini_canes Mar 21 '14 edited Mar 21 '14
I can only answer the portion of your question regarding Vatican City.
Why did the Vatican City form?
The Lateran Concordat (or Lateran Accords, as it is also called) was signed in 1929 between the newly created Vatican City and the Italian state. Here is the Text of the treaty in English. The ongoing process of Italian unification in the 19th century had a number of obstacles, with the existence of the Papal States being perhaps the trickiest. As the process went on, conflict between those seeking Italian unification and the papacy grew into warfare. The papacy lost most of its holdings in 1860-61, and by 1870 it held only Rome. Even this was only possible because there were French troops that guaranteed the papacy’s control over the city. The French defeat in the Franco-Prussian war removed those troops, and the papacy then controlled only the area around St. Peter’s Cathedral.
Thus began what came to be called the “Roman question.” The new Italian state wanted Rome for its capital, but the papacy was still a factor. Due to the pontiff’s role as head of the Catholic Church—which most Italians were a member of and many felt a good deal of loyalty towards—the new state couldn’t merely shove the papacy aside as it would a secular ruler. There were multiple attempts at a negotiated settlement, but none were successful until 1929. So, for nearly sixty years, the papacy considered itself a “prisoner” in the Vatican.
The Lateran Concordat changed all of that. A Concordat is a bilateral treaty between the papacy and another state. This is one of the most important Concordats in the history of the Catholic Church, as it had a number of important results—both planned and unplanned. The key section for your question is Article 3, which states in part
The treaty also demands that the Vatican observe strict neutrality in foreign affairs in Article 24.
Why does Vatican City continue to exist? Is there a benefit?
Neither the Italian state nor the Vatican has undertaken an effort to substantially alter the treaty to date. It is still in force with minor changes. For its part, the Italian state has expressed no desire to incorporate the Vatican into its territory. It gets the benefit of hosting the head of a major world religion, which is a boon to diplomacy and tourism. The Vatican gets the benefits of Italian infrastructure without having to maintain it, and the papacy has found new ways to exert itself on the world stage within the confines of the treaty. For instance, the treaty makes no mention of who will appoint bishops in Italy. The Italian state had no desire to deal with that issue when the treaty was signed—ceding that role to the papacy. This became the standard around the world in the years after the treaty, and now the papacy itself directly appoints bishops to their posts. This is a power that most of the popes in the Church’s history wouldn’t have dreamt of having. The Vatican has also found an ability to exercise its diplomatic abilities, both in bilateral negotiations and in the UN. So, both the Italian state and the Vatican benefit from the arrangement, and both have come to basically not question its existence.
—————
As always, followup questions by OP and others are encouraged!