¹ Philip Morton Shand, ‘A Note on the New Belgrade’, Architect's Journal, 1734 (April 11, 1928), 504, cited after: Blagojević, Ljiljana, Modernism in Serbia: The Elusive Margins of Belgrade Architecture 1919–1941 (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2003), x–xi, see also 127Google Scholar.

² Vuksanović-Macura, Zlata, Život na ivici: stanovanje sirotinje u Beogradu 1919–1941 (Belgrade: Orion Art, 2012), 40Google Scholar. See also: Conley, Tanja D., Urban Architectures in Interwar Yugoslavia (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020), 93Google Scholar. On the dreary visual appearance of the city embankments in the 1930s see: Kojić, Branislav, Društveni uslovi razvitka arhitektonske struke u Beogradu 1920–1940. godine (Belgrade: SANU, 1979), 19Google Scholar. The reality of Belgrade's urban appearance stood in sharp contrast with historiographical myths about the pre-1914 ‘golden age of Serbia’; see: Stojanović, Dubravka, Srbija i demokratija 1903–1914: Istorijska studija o ‘zlatnom dobu srpske demokratije’ (Belgrade: Udruženje za društvenu istoriju, 2003)Google Scholar. On Belgrade urbanism and infrastructure within this context see: Stojanović, Dubravka, Kaldrma i asfalt: urbanizacija i evropeizacija Beograda 1890–1914 (Belgrade: Udruženje za društvenu istoriju, 2020)Google Scholar.

³ On Belgrade's urban and social transformation in the interwar period see: Conley, Urban Architectures, 89–126; Conley, Tanja Damljanović, ‘Belgrade’, in Makaš, Emily Gunzburger and Conley, Tanja Damljanović, eds., Capital Cities in the Aftermath of Empires: Planning in Central and Southeastern Europe (Abingdon: Routledge, 2010), 45–60Google Scholar.

⁴ Ilijevski, Aleksandra, ‘Prilog proučavanju arhitekture i ideologije Mosta viteškog kralja Aleksandra prvog ujedinitelja u Beogradu’, Nasledje, 13 (2013), 211Google Scholar.

⁵ Kojić, Društveni uslovi, 19.

⁶ Among others: Kadijević, Aleksandar, ‘Savsko priobalje u Beogradu (1918–1941): pogled na arhitektonsko-urbanistički razvoj’, in Ostajmer, Branko, ed., Rijeka Sava u povijesti (Slavonski Brod: Hrvatski institut za povijest, 2015), 505–24Google Scholar; Ilijevski, ‘Prilog proučavanju’, 211–9; Kadijević, Aleksandar, ‘Istorija i arhitektura Zemunskog mosta Kralja Aleksandra I Karadjordjevića’, Pinus Zapisi, 4 (1996), 7–19Google Scholar.

⁷ Conley, Urban Architectures; Conley, ‘Belgrade’.

⁸ On the relationships between architectural culture and Yugoslav nation-building see: Ignjatović, Aleksandar, Jugoslovenstvo u arhitekturi 1904–1941 (Belgrade: Gradjevinska knjiga, 2007)Google Scholar.

⁹ Blagojević, Modernism, x.

¹⁰ Bogdanović, Jelena, Robinson, Lilien Filipovitch and Marjanović, Igor, eds., On the Very Edge: Modernism and Modernity of Interwar Serbia (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2014)Google Scholar.

¹¹ On architectural, urban and infrastructural constructions in interwar Yugoslavia and their ideological roles see: Conley, Architectures; Ignjatović, Jugoslovenstvo.

¹² On Germany see: Hagen, Joshua and Ostergren, Robert C., Building Nazi Germany: Place, Space, Architecture and Ideology (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2019)Google Scholar; Thies, Jochen, Hitler's Plans for Global Domination: Nazi Architecture and Ultimate War Aims (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2014)Google Scholar. On Italy see: McLaren, Brian L., Modern Architecture, Empire and Race in Fascist Italy (Leiden: Brill, 2021)Google Scholar; Maulsby, Lucy M., Fascism, Architecture and the Claiming of Modern Milan, 1922–1943 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2014)Google Scholar; Kallis, Aristotle, The Third Rome: The Making of the Fascist Capital (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014)Google Scholar. On the Soviet Union see: Zubovich, Katherine, Moscow Monumental: Soviet Skyscrapers and Urban Life in Stalin's Capital (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020)Google Scholar; Danilo Udovički-Selb, ‘Between Modernism and Socialist Realism: Soviet Architectural Culture Under Stalin's Revolution from Above: 1928–1938’, Journal of Architectural Historians, 68, 4 (2009), 467–95; Hugh D. Hudson, Jr., Blueprints and Blood: The Stalinization of Soviet Architecture, 1917–1973 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).

¹³ See: Michael Mikenberg, ‘Introduction’, in Michael Mikenberg, ed., Power and Architecture: The Construction of Capitals and the Politics of Space (New York: Berghahn, 2014), 2.

¹⁴ Thies, Plans, 79; Hagen and Ostergren, Building, 91–6; Paul Baxa, ‘Piacentini's Window: The Modernism of the Fascist Master Plan of Rome’, Contemporary European History, 13, 1 (2004), 1–20; McLaren, Architecture, 33–53.

¹⁵ Bozdoğan, Sibel, Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001), 10Google Scholar.

¹⁶ On the history of Yugoslavism see: Dennison Rusinow, ‘The Yugoslav Idea Before Yugoslavia’, in Dejan Djokić, ed., Yugoslavism: Histories of a Failed Idea, 1918–1992 (London: Hurst, 2003), 11–26; Arnold Suppan, ‘Yugoslavism versus Serbian, Croatian, and Slovene Nationalism’, in Norman M. Naimark and Holly Case, eds., Yugoslavia and its Historians: Understanding the Balkan Wars of the 1990s (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 116–39; Djokić, Dejan, Elusive Compromise: A History of Interwar Yugoslavia (New York: Hurst, 2007)Google Scholar; Banac, Ivo, National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988), 21–140Google Scholar; Nielsen, Christian Axboe, Making Yugoslavs: Identity in King Alexander's Yugoslavia (Toronto: University of Torornto Press, 2014)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Among numerous studies of Yugoslavism the most important are: Djokić, Compromise; Dejan Djokić, ‘(Dis)integrating Yugoslavia: King Alexander and Interwar Yugoslavism’, in Djokić, ed., Yugoslavism, 136–56; Banac, Question, 98–102; Wolf Dietrich Behschnitt, Nationalismus bei Serben und Kroaten, 1830–1914. Analyse und Typologie der nationalen Ideologie (München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1980). Also see: Lampe, John R., Yugoslavia as History: Twice There Was a Country (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 71–194Google Scholar; Sabrina P. Ramet, The Three Yugoslavias: State-building and Legitimation, 1918–2005 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006), 35–112; Rogel, Carole, The Slovenes and Yugoslavism, 1890–1914 (Boulder, CO: East European Quarterly, 1977), 70–6Google Scholar.

¹⁸ On this particular topic see: Todorova, Maria, Imagining the Balkans (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

¹⁹ While Christian Nielsen, relying on Behschnitt's typology, distingushes unitarist, integral and federal Yugoslavism, as well as pseudo-Yugoslavism, other authors propose different typologies. See: Jovo Bakić, Ideologije jugoslovenstva između srpskog i hrvatskog nacionalizma: 1914–1941 (Zrenjanin: Gradska i narodna biblioteka, 2004); Ljubodrag Dimić, Kulturna politika Kraljevine Jugoslavije 1918–1941, vol. 1 (Belgrade: Stubovi kulture, 1996), 285–323.

²⁰ Banac, Question, 163.

²¹ On the other hand, the Serbian Democrats also pursued the primordialist variant of Yugoslavism; although politically opposed to the Radicals, they too advocated ‘national oneness’ for justifying political centralism, but not in terms of assuming Serbian supremacy; see: Banac, Question, 188.

²² Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 151. However, Nielsen's account of the cultural dimension of Yugoslavism does not surpass the scope and depth of Ivo Banac's seminal study.

²³ Namely, the Croatian Peasant-Democratic Coalition, the Yugoslav Muslim Organization and the Slovene People's Party.

²⁴ Dimić, Politika, 316; Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 211–17, 230–1.

²⁵ Arhiv Jugoslavije (Archives of Yugoslavia, hereafter AJ), Program Jugoslovenske radikalne zajednice, Zbirka Milana Stojadinovića (37), f-12/a. j. 79.

²⁶ See: Aleksandar Ignjatović, ‘Architecture, Urban Development, and the Yugoslavization of Belgrade, 1850–1941’, Centropa, 9, 2 (2009), 110–26; Ignjatović, Jugoslovenstvo.

²⁷ Jeremy F. Walton, ‘Architectures of interreligious tolerance: The infrastructural politics of place and space in Croatia and Turkey’, New Diversities, 17, 2 (2015), 9.

²⁸ Mikenberg, ‘Introduction’.

²⁹ Murray Edelman, From Art to Politics: How Artistic Creations Shape Political Conceptions (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995).

³⁰ Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 152.

³¹ Useful here is: Bernd J. Fischer Nielsen, ed., Balkan Strongmen: Dictators and Authoritarian Rulers of South Eastern Europe (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2007).

³² For details about the construction see: ‘Konkurs za projekat novog mosta Beograd-Zemun’, Vreme, 19 May 1929; A. A., ‘Gradjenje mosta Kralja Aleksandra I i puta Beograd-Zemun’, Politika, 10 April 1930; ‘Radovi na Zemunskom mostu Kralja Aleksandra I’, Politika, 24 July 1931.

³³ According to the 1910 census, Zemun was predominantly Catholic, populated by Germans (38 per cent), Croats (13 per cent) and Hungarians (12 per cent), while Serbs counted for 33 per cent of the city's population. In the interwar period Zemun kept its Catholic majority. See: Damir Matanović, ‘Etnička i vjerska slika Srijema 1880–1910’, Povijesni zbornik, 3, 4 (2009), 191; Györe Zoltán, Pfeiffer Attila, ‘Osnovne demografske odlika Ugarske prema popisu stanovništva iz 1910. godine’, Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, XLII, 2 (2017), 103. Tanja D. Conley incorrectly states that prior to the war 70 per cent of Zemun's population was Croatian: Conley, Architectures, 105. On the administrative merging of Belgrade and Zemun in 1934 see: ‘Poslednja odborska sednica Gradskog odbora u Zemunu: Pred spajanje Beograda i Zemuna u jednu opštinu’, Politika, 28 March 1934.

³⁴ Mirjana Roter-Blagojević and Marta Vukotić Lazar, ‘The 1923 Belgrade Master Plan – Historic Town Modernization’, Planning Perspectives, 14 (2017), 14.

³⁵ Conley, Architectures, 90.

³⁶ Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 102.

³⁷ The seats of banates were designed for the Vardar Banate (Skopje), the Vrbas Banate (Banja Luka), the Danube Banate (Novi Sad), the Morava Banate (Niš), the Zeta Banate (Cetinje) and the Littoral Banate (Split): see: Ignjatović, Jugoslovenstvo, 383–98.

³⁸ ‘Most Viteškog Kralja Aleksandra I Ujedinitelja svečano je osvećen i predat saobraćaju’, Beogradske opštinske novine, 53, 12 (1934), 862.

³⁹ Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 248. On the ideological ambiguity of interwar Yugoslavism see: Djokić, Elusive Compromise; Rusinow, ‘Idea’, 20–1; Kosta St. Pavlowitch, ‘The First World War and the Unification of Yugoslavia’, in Djokić, ed., Yugoslavism, 28.

⁴⁰ Ignjatović, Jugoslovenstvo, 231–306.

⁴¹ See: ‘Konkurs za projekat’; A. A., ‘Pitanje gradjenja mosta Beograd-Zemun rešeno. Radovi su ustupljeni francuskom društvu Batignolles i nemačkom preduzeću Gutehoffnungshütte’, Vreme, 10 April 1930; ‘Gradjenje mosta Kralja Aleksandra I i puta Beograd-Zemun’, Politika, 10 April 1930. The construction works were conducted by the French engineer Dominique Gastaldi, famous for building iron bridges at the time. See: ‘Radovi na Zemunskom mostu’. In the early 1930s, the construction industry was among the most profitable employers in Yugoslavia, attracting foreign capital; see: Conley, Architectures, 89–90.

⁴² ‘Most Viteškog Kralja’, 862.

⁴³ I. Trifunović, ‘Zašto baš lavovi?’, Politika, 14 March 1933.

⁴⁴ ‘Most Viteškog Kralja’, 866–7.

⁴⁵ Reports sent to the President of the Council of Ministers, the army general Petar Živković: AJ, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 1234.

⁴⁶ Jeremy F. Walton, ‘Textured Historicity and the Ambivalence of Imperial Legacies’, History and Anthropology, 30 (2019), 357.

⁴⁷ ‘Most Viteškog Kralja’, 867.

⁴⁸ P. Cerović, ‘Da li su lavovi tudjinski simboli?’, Politika, 15 March 1933.

⁴⁹ The unsigned memorandum for the Ministry of Infrastructure dated 17 July 1929 in: AJ, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 1234.

⁵⁰ ‘Most Viteškog Kralja’, 866.

⁵¹ Sabo Jelić, ‘Inženjerska estetika – Zemunski most’, Srpski književni glasnik, 42, 2 (1934), 564–9; Djurdje Bošković, ‘Most Beograd-Zemun’, Srpski književni glasnik, 44, 1 (1935), 70–1.

⁵² Similar appreciation was expressed by Miša Manojlović and Rajko Tatić, the Belgrade architects and declared modernists who also thought that decorating a modern bridge was not even worth considering: ‘Prvo treba rešiti urbanistički problem i raščistiti prilaz Zemunskom mostu, pa ga tek onda ukrašavati’, Pravda, 10 March 1934.

⁵³ Djordje Lazarević, ‘Nekoliko zapažanja o mostovima danas’, Umetnički pregled, 3, 1 (1939), 21–3.

⁵⁴ Christian Menn, Prestressed Concrete Bridges (Basel: Birkhäuser, 1990), 20. See: Hagen and Ostergren, Building; David P. Billington, Robert Maillart Bridges: The Art of Engineering (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989); Kristen Ellen Finnegan, Engineering Aesthetics: Suspension Bridges of the 1920s and 1930s (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989).

⁵⁵ Richard Vahrenkamp, The German Autobahn 1920–1945 (Lohmar-Köln: Josef Eul Verlag, 2010), 185.

⁵⁶ On the clash between the ‘historic/modern paradigms’ in Belgrade's architectural culture see: Blagojević, Modernism, 140; cf. 57–62.

⁵⁷ Jovana Babović, Metropolitan Belgrade: Culture and Class in Interwar Yugoslavia (Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, 2018), 5.

⁵⁸ Tara Zahra, ‘Imagined Noncommunities: National Indifference as a Category of Analysis’, Slavic Review, 69, 1 (2010), 93–119.

⁵⁹ Ibid., 96.

⁶⁰ Widely known as the ‘court architect’, he was in charge of designing a whole series of state-sponsored projects in Belgrade and across the country.

⁶¹ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu postaviti Konjanici g. Ivana Meštrovića za koje bi imalo da se plati 22 miliona dinara’, Pravda, 3 March 1934; ‘Prvo treba rešiti’; Bošković, ‘Most’, 70–1.

⁶² Conley, Architectures, 93.

⁶³ On this topic see: Tanja Zimmermann, Der Balkan zwischen Ost und West: Mediale Bilder und kulturpolitische Prägungen (Cologne: Böhlau, 2014), 1–24.

⁶⁴ ‘Novim putevima’, Jugosloven, 1 (1931), 2.

⁶⁵ The polemic is well documented in archival documents; see: AF, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 1149, f. 1238.

⁶⁶ AJ, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 1149.

⁶⁷ Branko Popović, ‘Zašto je nemogućno izvesti Meštrovićev dekorativni projekat za Zemunski most’, Politika, 22 March 1934.

⁶⁸ Bošković, ‘Most’, 71.

⁶⁹ Lazarević, ‘Nekoliko’, 22.

⁷⁰ ‘Prvo treba rešiti’.

⁷¹ Homi K. Bhabha, ‘DissemiNation: Time, Narrative and the Margins of the Modern Nation’, in Homi K. Bhabha,The Location of Culture (Abingdon: Routledge, 1990), 139–70.

⁷² Hilde Heynen, ‘Walter Benjamin: The Dream of a Classless Society’, in Hilde Heynen, Architecture and Modernity: A Critique (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1999), 100.

⁷³ Ignjatović, Jugoslovenstvo, 361–7.

⁷⁴ Aleksandar Ignjatović, ‘Images of the Nation Foreseen: Ivan Meštrović's Vidovdan Temple and Primordial Yugoslavism’, Slavic Review 73, 4 (2014), 828–58; Andrew B. Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation: Literature and Cultural Politics in Yugoslavia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999), 54–59, 110–2.

⁷⁵ On Meštrović's political engagement see: Vinko Srhoj, ‘Ivan Meštrović i politika kao prostorahistorijskog idealizma’, Ars Adriatica, 4 (2014), 369–84; Norka Machiedo Mladinić, ‘Političko opredjeljenje i umjetnički rad mladog Meštrovića’, Časopis za suvremenu povijest, 41, 1 (2007), 143–70; Norka Machiedo Mladinić, ‘Prilog proučavanju djelovanja Ivana Meštrovića u Jugoslavenskom odboru’, Časopis za suvremenu povijest, 39, 1 (2007), 133–55.

⁷⁶ Some drafts show that he put wings to horses and horsemen alternatively.

⁷⁷ See: Vladimir Mitrović, ‘Dinastički spomenici u Kraljevini SHS/Jugoslaviji (1919–1941)’, available at https://graditeljins.wordpress.com/2015/09/15/dinasticki-spomenici-u-kraljevini-shs-jugoslaviji-1919-1941/ (last visited 19 Jan. 2022)

⁷⁸ Hagen and Ostergren, Building, 94.

⁷⁹ The king's signatures can still be seen on several architectural drawings which are kept in: AJ, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 601. See also Meštrović's account in his memoirs: Ivan Meštrović, Uspomene na političke ljude i dogadjaje (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969), 216.

⁸⁰ Meštrović, Uspomene, 199.

⁸¹ Ivan Ćurčin, ed., Meštrović (Zagreb: Nova Evropa, 1933), CXV.

⁸² Uglješa Rajčević, ‘Konjanici za Most kralja Aleksandra I u Beogradu’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 34 (1987), 210; Žarko Vidović, Ivan Meštrović i sukob skulptora s arhitektom (Sarajevo: Veselin Masleša, 1961), 245.

⁸³ Ilija Ž. Trifunović, ‘Zašto baš lavovi?’, Politika, 14 March 1933.

⁸⁴ Ćurčin, Meštrović, CXV.

⁸⁵ Before the Serbo-Croatian compromise was reached, Meštrović had been among a group of (mainly) Croatian intellectuals who signed a petition aiming at political and administrative decentralisation of the country in proportion to ethnic and historical criteria. This program was outlined as ‘A compromise needed for the Yugoslav re-composition’, with three regions of mainly ethno-historical status (Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia) and two separated territories of compound ethnic identity (Bosnia and Vojvodina). The programme was integrally published in the Zagreb periodical Nova Evropa (New Europe). See: Albert Bazala, Milan Ćurčin, Milivoj Dežma, Joza Kljaković, Ivan Meštrović et al., ‘Jedan prijedlog za Nacrt Ustava’, Nova Evropa 30, 7–8 (1937), 228–30.

⁸⁶ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu’.

⁸⁷ Popović, ‘Zašto je nemogućno’.

⁸⁸ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu’.

⁸⁹ ‘Za postavljanje gigantskih stubova i skulptura g. Meštrovića na Zemunskom mostu trebalo bi izgraditi novu veštačku podlogu’, Vreme, 17 March 1934.

⁹⁰ ‘Prvo treba rešiti urbanistički problem i raščistiti prilaz Zemunskom mostu, pa ga tek onda ukrašavati’, Pravda, 10 March 1934. Further meetings brought about an official memorandum of the Association containing three principal objections – the first was concerned with a ‘stylistic discrepancy’ between the iron bridge and its stone decoration; the second dealt with issues of traffic because the planned statues would make pedestrian lanes narrower; and the final one discussed the problematic handling of the finances; see: ‘Ostvarenjem ove zamisli učinila bi se jedna znatna greška u smislu etstetskom, tehničko-komunikativnom i finansijskom’, Pravda, 17 March 1934; cf. ‘Za postavljanje gigantskih stubova’.

⁹¹ ‘Zapisnik XV glavne godišnje Skupštine Udruženja jugoslovenskih inženjera i tehničara, održane 27. maja 1934. god. u Zagrebu’, Tehnički list, 16, 17–18 (1934), 1.

⁹² ‘G. Ivan Meštrović odgovara Udruženju jugoslovenskih likovnih umetnika i Udruženju arhitekata’, Pravda, 17 March 1934.

⁹³ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu’.

⁹⁴ [Dimitrije] Jurišić, ‘Zapisnik sednice Gl. uprave U. J. I. A. održane 8. jula tek. godine u Beogradu’, Tehnički list, 5, 14 (1923), 112.

⁹⁵ Rajko Kušević, ‘Zapisvik V. Glavne redovne Skupštine Sekcije Zagreb Udruženja jugoslavenskih inženjera i arhitekata’, Tehnički list, 6, 7 (1924), 92. See also: ‘Rezolucija odbora za pitanje o zaštiti domaće industrije’, Tehnički list, 8, 16 (1926), 238.

⁹⁶ Bresciani, Marco, ‘The Battle for Post-Habsburg Trieste/Trst: State Transition, Social Unrest, and Political Radicalism (1918–23)’, Austrian History Yearbook, 52 (2021), 184, 193–4Google Scholar.

⁹⁷ See: Mario Brasciani, ‘The Post-Imperial Space of the Upper Adriatic and the Post-War Ascent of Fascism’, in Tim Buchen and Frank Grelka, eds., Akteure der Neuordnung: Ostmitteleuropa und das Erbe der Imperien, 1917–1924 (Berlin: epubli, 2016), 47–63.

⁹⁸ Claire Morelon, ‘Introduction’, in Paul Miller and Claire Morelon, eds., Embers of Empire: Continuity and Rupture in the Habsburg Successor States after 1918 (New York: Berghahn, 2019), 1–14. See also: Kożuchowski, Adam, The Afterlife of Austria-Hungary: The Image of the Habsburg Monarchy in Interwar Europe (Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, 2013)Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ ‘Sastanak Sekcije Beograd’, Tehnički list, 11, 3 (1929), 50.

¹⁰⁰ A comprehensive study of the Russian émigrés in Yugoslavia and the Balkans is: Miroslav Jovanović, Ruska emigracija na Balkanu, 1920–1930 (Belgrade: Čigoja štampa, 2006). Several synthetic works discuss the Russian architects in Yugoslavia: Aleksandar Kadijević, ‘Djelatnost ruskih arhitekata emigranata u Hrvatskoj i Jugoslaviji (1920–1980)’, Prostor, 26, 2 (2018), 309–18; Kadijević, Aleksandar and Djurdjević, Marina, ‘Russian Emigrant Architects in Yugoslavia (1918–1941)’, Centropa, 2 (2001), 139–48Google Scholar.

¹⁰¹ ‘Godišnja Skupština Udruženja jugoslovenskih inženjera i arhitekata’, Tehnički list, 6, 17 (1924), 204.

¹⁰² Conley, Architectures, 96.

¹⁰³ See for instance: Jovanović, Emigracija, 246–9; Miodrag Sibinović, ‘Ruska emigracija u srpskoj kulturi XX veka – značaj, okviri i perspektive proučavanja’, in Miodrag Sibinović et al., eds., Ruska emigracija u srpskoj kulturi XX veka, vol. 1 (Belgrade: Filološki fakultet, 1994), 5.

¹⁰⁴ On the work of Nikolay Krasnov in Yugoslavia see: Željko Škalamera, ‘Arhitekta Nikola Krasnov (1864–1939)’, Sveske Društva istoričara umetnosti Srbije, VII, 14 (1983), 109–29; Aleksandar Kadijević, ‘Prilog proučavanju dela arhitekte Nikole Krasnova u Jugoslaviji (1922–1939)’, Saopštenja, 26 (1994), 184–90; Aleksandar Kadijević, ‘Rad Nikolaja Krasnova u Ministarstvu građevina Kraljevine SHS/Jugoslavije u Beogradu od 1922. do 1939. godine’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 44 (1997), 221–55.

¹⁰⁵ On the representative architecture by the Russian émigrés see: Toševa, Snežana, Graditeljstvo u službi države: delatnost i ostvarenja Arhitektonskog odelenja Ministarstva gradjevina u srpskoj arhitekturi 1918–1941 (Belgrade: Muzej nauke i tehnike, 2018)Google Scholar; Toševa, Snežana, ‘Rad ruskih arhitekata u Ministarstvu gradjevina u periodu izmedju dva svetska rata’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 51 (2004), 169–81Google Scholar; Marina Djurđević, ‘Arhitekt Vasilij (Vilhelm) Fjodorovič Baumgarten’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 51 (2004), 183–90; Marina Djurđević, ‘Prilog proučavanju delatnosti arhitekte Valerija Vladimiroviča Staševskog u Beogradu’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 45–46 (1998–9), 151–70; Aleksandar Kadijević, ‘Beogradski period rada arhitekte Viktora Viktoroviča Lukomskog (1920–1943)’, Godišnjak grada Beograda, 45–46 (1998–9), 115–31.

¹⁰⁶ Ignjatović, Aleksandar, ‘Razlika u funkciji sličnosti: arhitektura ruskih emigranata u Srbiji između dva svetska rata i konstrukcija srpskog nacionalnog identiteta’, Tokovi istorije, 1 (2011), 63–75Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Meštrović, Uspomene, 199.

¹⁰⁸ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu’.

¹⁰⁹ Aleksandar Ignjatović, ‘From Constructed Memory to Imagined National Tradition: Tomb of the Unknown Yugoslav Hero (1934–1938)’, Slavonic and East European Review, 88, 4 (2010), 624–51.

¹¹⁰ See for example: Djurdje Bošković, ‘Ispitivanje i rušenje grada na Avali’, Starinar, 10–11 (1935–6), 144–5.

¹¹¹ Milan Ćurčin, ‘Meštrovićev “Pobednik’, Nova Evropa, XVI, 1, (1927), 2–8; Danijela Vanušić, ‘Podizanje Spomenika Pobede na Terazijama’, Nasledje, IX (2008), 193–209; Radina Vučetić-Mladenović, ‘Pobedjeni Pobednik’, Godišnjak za društvenu istoriju, VI, 2, (1999), 110–23.

¹¹² Drainac was the leader of the short-lived movement ‘Hypnism’, being one of many Serbian avant-gardists, like Ljubomir Micić and Miloš Crnjanski, who would later in their career become virulent nationalists.

¹¹³ Rade Drainac, ‘‘Ivan Meštrović: Studija o njegovom višem Ja’, Pravda, 18, 21 and 24 November 1934.

¹¹⁴ ‘G. Ivan Meštrović odgovara’.

¹¹⁵ M[ilan]. Ć[určin], ‘Opet hajka na Meštrovića’, Nova Evropa, XXVII, 3 (1934), 93–5.

¹¹⁶ Karaula, Željko, ‘Letter by Ivo Franić Požežanin, Director of the Ethnographic Museum in Zagreb, to the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Milan Stojadinović in 1937’, Etnološka istraživanja, 15 (2010), 237–45Google Scholar.

¹¹⁷ Ivo Franić, ‘Nemo propheta in patria’, Narodne novine, C, 71 (1934), 4–5.

¹¹⁸ M. R., ‘Da li će se na Zemunskom mostu’.

¹¹⁹ R. M., ‘Jedan buran umetnički skup u oronuloj opštinskoj zgradi’, Pravda, 3 March 1934. The same attitude was shared by a few engineers and architects, like Sabo Jelić, who wrote an article explaining, not without a hint of wry irony, that ‘despite the alacrity of the Association of Fine Arts, the now-regenerated Belgrade wears . . . the mock mask of classical beauty’. He added that this phenomenon ‘has not as yet been either ridiculed or condemned by colleagues’ who turned their attention to the problem only recently; see: Jelić, ‘Estetika’, 569.

¹²⁰ Bošković, ‘Most’, 71.

¹²¹ ‘Na Zemunskom mostu biće postavljena četiri ogromna lava, kao straža’, Politika, 6 March 1933; ‘Nepoznati gospodin koji se interesuje za lavove na Zemunskom mostu’, Politika, 8 March 1933; ‘Slučaj s lavovima’, Politika, 9 March 1933.

¹²² The sketches were dated 8 August 1931, see: AF, Ministarstvo gradjevina, F. 62, f. 435, zbirka planova 676.

¹²³ The ministry organised a special committee for the purpose whose members were Nikolay Krasnov and Petar Popović, the architects employed by the same ministry, accompanied by the sculptor Djordje Jovanović; see: АЈ, Ministarstvo gradjevina F. 62, f. 1230.

¹²⁴ ‘Na Zemunskom mostu’, Politika, 6 March 1933.

¹²⁵ Ilija Ž. Trifunović, ‘Zašto baš lavovi’, Politika, 14 March 1933; Pavle Cerović, ‘Da li su lavovi tudjinski simboli?’, Politika, 15 March 1933; Ilija Ž. Trifunović, ‘Da li su lavovi nacionalni simboli’, Politika, 17 March 1933; Pavle Cerović, ‘Da li “Dušanove novotarije” mogu biti naše’, Politika, 18 March 1933.

¹²⁶ On Trifunović-Birčanin see: Newman, John Paul, Yugoslavia in the Shadow of War: Veterans and the Limits of State Building, 1903–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 107–9Google Scholar.

¹²⁷ Trifunović, ‘Lavovi’.

¹²⁸ Cerović, ‘Novotarije’.

¹²⁹ Trifunović, ‘Lavovi’.

¹³⁰ Štampa, 16 December 1934.

¹³¹ See for example: Ćorović, Vladimir, Istorija Jugoslavije (Belgrade: Narodno delo, 1933)Google Scholar, Ćorović, Vladimir, Borba za nezavisnost Balkana (Belgrade: Balkanski institut, 1937)Google Scholar; Jovanović, Slobodan, Jugoslovenska misao u prošlosti i sadašnjosti (Belgrade: Biblioteka Srpskog kulturnog kluba i Sloboda: 1939)Google Scholar.

¹³² ‘Most Viteškog Kralja Aleksandra I Ujedinitelja svečano je osvećen i predat saobraćaju’, Beogradske opštinske novine, 53, 12 (1934), 862.

¹³³ Nielsen, Yugoslavs, 242.

¹³⁴ Dimić, Politika, 332.

¹³⁵ Kašanin, Milan, Susreti i pisma (Novi Sad: Matica srpska, 1974), 157Google Scholar.