The nLab article for commutative monoid says:
Just as a monoid can be seen as a category with one object, a commutative monoid can be seen as a bicategory with one object and one morphism (or equivalently, a monoidal category with one object).
I am not sure why this is true.
Suppose there is a category $C$ with a single object, $X$. This defines a monoid $M := hom(X, X)$ with composition as its operation. If $C$ is monoidal, then all of the following are true about $M$:
- There is a function $\otimes : M \times M \to M$
- $id \otimes id = id$
- $(f_1 \otimes f_2)(g_1 \otimes g_2) = f_1 g_1 \otimes f_2 g_2$
- There are three invertible elements $\alpha, \lambda, \rho \in M$.
- $((f \otimes g) \otimes h) \alpha = \alpha(f \otimes (g \otimes h))$.
- $(id \otimes f) \lambda = \lambda f$
- $(f \otimes id) \rho = \rho f$
- $\alpha (id \otimes \alpha^{-1}) = \alpha^{-1}(\alpha \otimes id)\alpha$
- $\alpha(id \otimes \lambda) = \rho \otimes id$
(Note that I am writing composition in diagrammatic order.)
The laws above are simplified versions of the laws for a general monoidal category. (2) and (3) state that $\otimes$ is a functor. (5), (6), and (7) are the naturality conditions for $\alpha$, $\lambda$, and $\rho$ respectively. And (8) and (9) are the "coherence conditions" that all monoidal categories must satisfy.
How can one prove from the nine properties above that $M$ is a commutative monoid? The Eckmann-Hilton argument seems promising, but that argument only applies if $\otimes$ is unital, and $\otimes$ is only unital up to conjugation by $\lambda$ and $\rho$.