Prior to 1870, Italy was several kingdoms, republics and duchies, with a federation of papal states in the middle, and Vatican, then just another cathedral hill in Rome, was not special – the pope mostly lived elsewhere. During the unification of Italy, the pope retreated to Vatican and troops left the palace alone. For almost 60 years, the papal state, now only controlling the Vatican area, was informally tolerated by Italy until Mussolini signed a 1929 treaty, recognizing the territory was independent.
To be honest, I’m not sure what the pope could do if he no longer came to good terms with the fascists but if I were him, I would retreat to an Allied cathedral on a “diplomatic mission” and ring the alarm, not caring if the tiny Vatican was occupied to Italy. Its bad wartime performance was becoming apparent and there would be a chance of reclaiming Vatican after it lost the war.
Prior to 1870, Italy was several kingdoms, republics and duchies, with a federation of papal states in the middle, and Vatican, then just another cathedral hill in Rome, was not special – the pope mostly lived elsewhere. During the unification of Italy, the pope retreated to Vatican and troops left the palace alone. For almost 60 years, the papal state, now only controlling the Vatican area, was informally tolerated by Italy until Mussolini signed a 1929 treaty, recognizing the territory was independent.
To be honest, I’m not sure what the pope could do if he no longer came to good terms with the fascists but if I were him, I would retreat to an Allied cathedral on a “diplomatic mission” and ring the alarm, not caring if the tiny Vatican was occupied to Italy. Its bad wartime performance was becoming apparent and there would be a chance of reclaiming Vatican after it lost the war.
Would the Pope have really been in danger? Wouldn’t most Italians see him as worth protecting due to Italy’s long relationship with Roman Catholicism?