The Liechtenstein Institute organised a conference between 22 and 25 October 2025 in Balzers under the title Historical small state studies: State of research and perspectives. Its aim was to discuss the situation of the research trend of small state studies, well established in the field of political science, in the framework of history writing, as well as to identify future chances for closer co-operation. The twenty-six papers presented, apart from a few more general surveys, were case studies from early modern and modern small states, primarily from Europe, but some also touched upon the Caribbean, or the co-operation of African and Asian states after World War II.
Our project was represented by three members. Our principal investigator, Gábor Kármán gave an overview of the project’s aims and the work that has been done so far. In his paper he called attention to the difficulties of making a comparative analysis of the diplomacy of pre-modern and modern small states, since in the earlier cases collective decision-making, based on the state as institution, was unique, and foreign policy activities were almost exclusively determined by the personal preferences and dynastic interests of the rulers.
The two other project members demonstrated small-state problems in the region through case studies. Marian Coman argued that the weakness and instability of Wallachia, the lack of a clearly defined territory, the loosely defined dynasty, the deficiencies of the institutional structures, which are usually identified as shortcomings in the development of the state, contributed largely to the success of the territory’s elite to integrate to the power structures of the Ottoman Empire in the sixteenth century and thus secure Wallachia’s survival as an identifiable unit of foreign policy. The fact that various groups of the elite heralded different regional identities concerning the entire polity also added to this success.
The Ragusan problems of being a small state were introduced by Vedran Stojanović, who analysed a political pamphlet of the late-eighteenth-century Toma Bassegli. Contrary to Wallachia, Ragusa had elaborate institutional structures and an outstandingly stable political system, built on rigid rules concerning collectivism and traditionalism. For Bassegli, touched by Enlightenment ideas, it seemed unbearable and suffocating, a system, which was an obstacle for the city state’s entry to modernity and thus acted against the further survival of Ragusa under the changed international circumstances.
