Traditiones 54 (1): 37–59 | COBISS: 1.01 | CC BY 4.0 | DOI: 10.3986/Traditio2025540103
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of 
Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Jernej Gregorač
Independent Researcher, Slovenia
jernej.gregorac@gmail.com
The paper presents the Trail of Remembrance 
and Comradeship, a memorial trail in Ljubljana, 
Slovenia, and through the elements of mem-
ory, materiality, and movement on the trail 
explores how certain memorials were created 
and curated in Slovenia under socialism, and 
how they are maintained and promoted as 
heritage in contemporary times. By combining 
theory on memorials in heritage studies with 
active engagement with the trail, the paper 
addresses our relationship with heritage as a 
multi-layered and dynamic process.
 ⬝ Keywords: heritage, memorial, Second 
World War, socialism, Slovenia
Članek z elementi spomina, materialnosti in 
gibanja predstavi spominsko pot, Pot spominov 
in tovarištva, v Ljubljani, in s tem razgrinja 
pogled na to, kako so se v času socializma 
v Sloveniji ustvarjali spominski prostori in 
kako se ti prostori danes še ohranjajo in uve-
ljavljajo kot dediščina. S kombinacijo teorije 
o spomenikih in aktivnega udejstvovanja na 
poti obravnava tudi naš odnos do dediščine 
kot večplastnega in dinamičnega procesa.
 ⬝ Ključne besede: dediščina, spomenik, 
druga svetovna vojna, socializem, Slovenija
Introduction
The Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship (Sln. Pot Spominov in Tovarištva, PST) is 
a 33 kilometres long memorial trail that fully encircles the city of Ljubljana. Primarily it 
is a space dedicated to the memory of the traumatic experience of Ljubljana’s occupation 
in the Second World War, when the city was completely enclosed by a barbed wire 
fence. Today, the trail is an important part of both the tangible and intangible heritage 
of the city, as it is also a place of a yearly commemorative march that celebrates the 
city’s liberation in May 1945.
Besides possessing a strong memorial value, the trail has over the years developed 
to become a widely used public surface and one of the bigger recreational and green 
areas of the city. As such, the trail is a good case study of how to create, manage, 
and adapt heritage spaces in urban settings, while its story also offers an insight into 
the planning, management, and designation of heritage spaces in post-war socialist 
Slovenia and Yugoslavia.
The paper presents the case study of this memorial landscape as a part of the city’s 
heritage and connects it to similar discussions in heritage studies. Its research focus 
is to present it through the elements of memory, materiality, and movement. Through 
this analysis, I plan to observe and discuss the ways in which the memory of traumatic 
Jernej Gregorač 
38 |     Traditiones
experiences can be physically preserved and constructed in an urban setting, how the 
trail itself was developed as a part of the city’s heritage, and how heritage spaces can 
be perceived outside of their designated contexts.
The major questions of my research inquire how the memory of the Second World 
War was preserved and managed as heritage in a socialist Slovenian society, and how 
it has transitioned to contemporary times where individual memories of the events 
were replaced with more “curated” narratives of past events. Secondly, I also plan 
to look at the trail through the lenses of past–present, materiality–intangibility, and 
urban development–green spaces, and see whether heritage spaces can be successfully 
observed through all these three perspectives, and what such observation can tell us 
about the preservation of memories that impacted larger areas as heritage. Finally, my 
plan was also to observe how the trail manifests itself as part of the city outside of the 
official heritage narratives, and what we can learn from this when discussing heritage 
in contemporary contexts.
For this, I will firstly address the origins of the trail and place it into the wider nar-
ratives of war memorials. Secondly, I will address the trail in the context of the city’s 
and the country’s socialist heritage and discuss how the heritage and experience of 
Yugoslav/Slovenian socialism influenced its creation and designation as a monument. 
Finally, on the example of the trail, I plan to reflect on the positioning of heritage in 
contemporary settings, especially on its relationship to urban landscape, natural envi-
ronment, and movement.
Methodology and sources
The following paper is based on the research for my unpublished Master’s thesis on 
the same subject at the Sustainable Heritage Management programme at the Aarhus 
University in 2020. The methods and sources used for it were very diverse and cover 
a wide array of different approaches and elements, although they are firmly footed in 
the sphere of heritage studies.
In relation to the historical background of the Second World War in Ljubljana, I 
relied primarily on Kranjc (2015), who researched the Slovenian experience of the 
war from an outsider’s perspective, and on Kos (2006), an invaluable resource on the 
trail itself. I also interviewed Nuša Kerševan (2020), a former mayor of Ljubljana, 
who had a major role during the time of the creation of the trail, Božo Repe (2020), a 
Slovenian historian of the Second World War in Slovenia, and Blaž Vurnik (2020), a 
chief curator for contemporary history at the City Museum of Ljubljana. The number 
of interviews for the research was limited because of the logistical difficulties and 
travel limitations during the time of the global pandemic, as I was then situated in 
Denmark.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 39
Walking as a form of ethnographic method1 also played a significant role in my 
research and helped me construct a broader picture of heritage on the trail, especially 
since walking or otherwise moving through the landscape allows for a detailed under-
standing of spaces (Wylie, 2002). I walked the trail several times before, alone and 
with company, engaging with its materiality through movement. Not being able to 
participate in the yearly commemorative event for the purpose of this research, I asked 
a group of volunteers to walk the trail instead, to answer a questionnaire and to send 
me photographic images of what they perceived as heritage on the trail.
Furthermore, a major body of literature in my research was connected to the role 
and theory of memory in heritage, where I can especially emphasize Nora’s (1989) 
concept of lieux de memoire or places of memory, the works of Winter (1995, 2006), 
Harrison (2013), and Lowenthal (1998, 2015), as well as Connerton’s (1989, 2008) 
integral work on remembering and forgetting in societies. MacDonald’s (2012) piece 
on presencing Europe’s past also helped me understand the trail as a reconstruction of 
the past as heritage in the present.
In order to fully grasp the topic in question, important sources were connected to 
the impact of conflict on cultural heritage (Sørensen, Viejo-Rose, 2015), commemora-
tion of war in the contemporary setting (Sumartojo, 2016), and the use of memory in 
commemorative places (Drozdzewski et al., 2016a). Furthermore, Abousnnouga and 
Machin’s (2013) work helped me understand how monuments communicate ideas, 
values, and identities they represent, while the volume by Carter et al. (2020) offered 
good insight into the articulation and change of heritage narratives in public spaces. 
An indispensable resource on the role and impact of revolutionary monuments in 
socialist Yugoslavia was also the publication on revolutionary memorials, edited by 
Horvatinčić and Žerovc (2023).
Finally, selected literature also helped me explore the relationship between landscapes 
and memory (De Nardi, Drozdzewski, 2019), the relationship between tangible and in-
tangible manifestations of heritage and commemorative atmospheres (Sumartojo, 2016), 
and narratives of understanding heritage within the context of sustainability (Baker, 
2006); all of which were important topics while addressing my research subject from a 
critical and reflective perspective. It is also important to note that my case study focuses 
on the management of a heritage landscape with a high emphasis on sustainability.
1 In the social sciences and humanities, walking is not a new phenomenon and has been revisited in the 
context of the mobility turn, non-representational theories, and anthropology and sociology of the body and 
the senses (see Pink, 2007; Edensor, 2010; Ingold, 2011; Shepherd et al. 2018; Rogelja Caf, Ledinek Lozej, 
2023).
Jernej Gregorač 
40 |     Traditiones
Occupation and the barbed wire fence
Before starting the journey on the trail, we have to briefly touch upon its origin. Clues 
to the fact that the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship is first and foremost a 
monument to the Slovenian experience of the Second World War can already be 
found in the trail’s title, in the words ‘remembrance’ and ‘comradeship’. The word 
comradeship, for example, embodies the ideals of the organised antifascist resistance 
of the Slovenian Partisans (Sln. Osvobodilna Fronta, OF) against the occupiers in the 
Second World War in Slovenia.2 Remembrance, on the other hand, signifies the way 
in which the post-war socialist Slovenian society intended to preserve these values for 
the present and future generations.
Resistance, spearheaded by the Communist Party of Slovenia, Christian Socialists, 
and the members of the gymnastic association Sokol was formed on 27 April 1941 after 
Slovenia, then a part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, was occupied and trisected between 
Germany, Hungary, and Italy in April 1941, with all three occupiers looking to erase 
any sign of Slovenian culture, nationhood and belonging in these annexed territories.
Ljubljana became the seat of the Italian occupation authorities, but it was also the 
centre of the Slovenian resistance movement. In order to sever the communication 
links between the leadership of the resistance in Ljubljana and combat units in the 
2 What was special about the OF was that it relied especially on the young and particularly women, who 
were attracted by the message of female emancipation – which was fulfilled after the war (Kranjc, 2015: 72).
Figure 1. Pillbox on the trail. Photo: Darko Gregorač, 2020.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 41
countryside, the Italian occupiers decided to completely encircle the city with a ring 
of barbed wire fence, fortified pillboxes and barricades (Repe, 2020) and closed the 
ring on 23 February 1942.3 This and other repressive measures in the city, including 
imprisonment, deportations, and execution of hostages, did not manage to break the 
resistance and the spirit of the subjugated populace.
In the end, the encirclement lasted for 1,170 days until 9 May 1945, when the 
detachments of the Yugoslav Army, together with Slovenian Partisan forces, finally 
entered and liberated the city. The fence as a physical object was subsequently cleared 
immediately after the war,4 but its existence left a large physical and psychological 
scar on the city and its inhabitants, which became the foundation for the later com-
memoration of these events.
Memory and heritage
At this point, the trail can be connected to the wider field of literature on the role and 
impact of memory, which is one of its integral components as an object of heritage. 
Memory is a powerful force encountered via experiences, emotions, places, and things. 
It provides us with identity narratives and positions us as individuals, communities, and 
nations (Drozdzewski et al., 2016b: 447–448). It can be used in political, social, and 
cultural contexts and for various reasons; such as to remember, to forget, to control, 
and to keep. Because memory “highlights ancestral traits and values that are in accord 
with our own” (Lowenthal, 1998: 139), it has the ability to connect the past with the 
present. Furthermore, for Harrison (2013: 167–168), the presence of memory is one 
of the crucial concerns in Western societies and one of the key cultural and political 
phenomena of the late 20th century modernity.
Nora (1989: 18–19) also introduces the term lieux de memoire, or places of memory, 
that are simple and ambiguous, natural and artificial, at once immediately available 
in concrete sensual experience and susceptible to the most abstract elaboration. These 
places are not everyday environments of memory, or milieux de memoire, but have 
material, symbolic, and functional value, and are created through a play of memory 
and history. As lieux de memoire, sites associated with key historical events, such as 
is the case with the trail, become heritage constructions of the past in the present day 
(Reeves, 2018: 67).
Recollection is integral in the process of heritage formation, as it recovers con-
sciousness of former events and confirms that we actually have a past that is vital to 
3 Ljubljana was the only current capital in occupied Europe to be completely enclosed within a barbed wire 
fence.
4 It was cleared by the detachments of the newly established Yugoslav National Army, while farmers cleared 
their fields of mines with specially modified ploughs (Repe, 2020).
Jernej Gregorač 
42 |     Traditiones
our being, which in turn hypnotises the present, making the circle complete (Lowenthal, 
2015: 303–308). Our interpretations of the past can legitimise a present social order 
(Connerton, 1989: 1–4). In the example of the trail, the idea for the specific type of 
remembrance through active commemoration was born from the experience of the 
war, as a form of a reminder of what had happened and should not be repeated. As 
such, the trail has the power to connect the people of the present to familial histories 
and the history of the nation.
According to Ricouer (cited in Drozdzewski et al., 2016b: 453), the reproduction of 
memory is especially challenged at the intersection of private and collective memories 
of events, where private or autobiographical memory reflects the more privatized sense 
of the past and tends to fade with time. Assmann (1995: 127) notices that everyday 
memory of traumatic events persists for only three to four generations, which is about 
seventy-five to a hundred years. Collective memory, on the other hand, is a socially 
constructed notion that has the potential to forge identities and construct the past from 
the position of the present. For such engagement with the past, MacDonald (2012: 233) 
introduces the term of past presencing, which is concerned with “the ways in which 
people variously draw on, negotiate, reconstruct, and perform the past in their ongoing 
lives”. In the case of the trail, private memories have successfully entered the public 
arena through an organized act of remembrance (i.e. yearly commemoration) and were 
given support by the political authorities of the time as a visible cultural monument, 
and a part of the officially recognised heritage of the city.
Figure 2. Image from the trail. Photo: Jure Burnik, 2020.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 43
Shaping the trail as a memorial
Furthermore, the process of creating and designating the trail as a memorial5 reflected 
wider narratives of rebuilding and developing a better, in the Slovenian case socialist 
society after the war. In that spirit, more than seven hundred self-governing organisations 
and communities signed the Contract of the Building and Maintenance of the Trail 
in 1977,6 while 150,000 Ljubljana residents, 60,000 youth volunteers from Slovenia 
and the whole of Yugoslavia, as well as Yugoslav National Army detachments in 
Ljubljana participated in the construction of the trail with manual labour and voluntary 
contributions since 1974 (Kos, 2006: 36). Activities connected to the creation of the 
trail counted on the support of the local community, and relied on collective effort 
and cooperation, in a sense reflecting the ideals and modus operandi of the Slovenian 
Partisans, as well as the political climate in Yugoslavia at the time when the country 
adapted the self-management model to all public and social activities after the consti-
tutional changes of 1974 (Kolešnik, 2023: 84).7
On the 40th anniversary of the liberation in May 1985, the ring was completed and 
the trail was officially designated as a “cultural memorial to the National Liberation 
Struggle (NOB), a memorial to the construction of a socialist society, and a memorial 
of curated nature” (MK SZDL, 1985: 2). The trail was officially protected as a memorial 
of common significance with a decree in 1988. At this point in time, at the onset of 
the end of the socialist regimes in Europe, remembering the NOB was still a prevalent 
narrative in the Slovenian society, however, a shift was happening. On the one hand 
this was a time when interest for the trail was renewed, because the people who had 
experienced the war were getting older and were starting to collect their memories 
with a wish to preserve them for the future as a part of the common experience of 
5 I refer to the term ‘memorial’ when addressing and discussing the trail as an object dedicated to com-
memoration, while ‘monument’ is used when focusing on its physical functions and aspects (Shanahan, 
Shanahan, 2017: 112).
6 Chronologically, the timeline of the trail is as follows:
1957 – first commemorative march takes place along the trail;
1959 – first memorial pillars are erected along the original trajectory of the barbed wire fence;
1973 – first tree is planted;
1974 – first volunteers start work on sections of the trail;
1977 – Contract of the Building and Maintenance of the Trail, serving as a basis for the construction of the 
whole trail, is signed;
1985 – ring is completed and the trail is designated as a cultural memorial to the National Liberation Struggle 
(NOB), a memorial to the construction of a socialist society, and a memorial of curated nature;
1988 – the trail is protected as a memorial of common significance;
1992 – the Green Ring Association is founded;
2016 – the commemorative march is listed under the Registry of Intangible Heritage of Slovenia.
7 Primarily connected to the economic sphere and the sphere of material production, socialist self-manage-
ment was a system in socialist Yugoslavia where the workers participated in the decision-making processes 
within their factories and other public organisations. The system was distinct from other Soviet-style socialist 
systems and was designed by a Yugoslav statesman of Slovenian origin, Edvard Kardelj.
Jernej Gregorač 
44 |     Traditiones
the nation.8 On the other hand, the trail’s designation as a memorial connected to antifascist 
resistance also led to its difficult period after the regime change in Slovenia in the early 
1990s, when the new city authorities attacked the symbolism and message of the trail 
and wanted to completely erase it from the memory as a part of the “tainted” socialist 
past. Such changes are usually consciously selected by a certain group of people that 
want to contribute to the transformation of collective memory and remembrance and 
find it advantageous to call for the punishment of the political and coercive authorities 
of the fallen regimes (Hoelscher, 2011: 289).
In the early 1990s, the new city authorities stopped the funding for the maintenance 
of the trail and even cut down the ceremonial wooden masts, leaving them to rot along 
the trail (Kerševan, 2020). Since 1991, some other Partisan monuments in Slovenia, 
and even more so in other parts of Yugoslavia, have been completely neglected, while 
the ideas of the antifascist fight, such as equality and comradeship, were also put aside 
in the prevalent political discourses in the region.
These attacks on the symbols and the trail itself led to the formation of the volun-
teer-based Green Ring Association, whose founding members were connected to the 
resistance movement and to the creation of the trail. Such groups that actively engage 
in remembrance as “memory activists” (Winter, 2006: 136–140), are not connected 
by kinship but by experience. The association nowadays has fewer members than at 
8 In the 1990s the same people started to donate their personal memorial belongings to history museums 
(Vurnik, 2020).
Figure 3. Trail marker. Photo: Jure Burnik, 2020.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 45
its peak, but still cooperates well with the municipality and maintains the trail, repairs 
monuments damaged by vandalism, and plants trees along the route of the trail.
Trail as a war memorial
With the trail, the city has received a memorial landscape constituting of a ritualized 
reminder of a notable traumatic event, as well as of the general suffering and sacrifice 
related to it. The meaning of memorialisation on the trail is not the glorification of 
individual heroes or actions, but centres on the collective experience. Besides that, 
the trail was also created with the prospect of post-war reconciliation in mind, so it 
also bears a message of peace. The relevance of its remembrance value is perpetually 
confirmed by an annual ceremony, which contributes to collective memory by promoting 
a shared experience of the values and emotions encountered during the war (Osborne, 
2018: 214–218).
War memorials in general proclaim an array of commemorative messages about 
war, including the fact that people die in wars. These memorials have been integral 
to the histories of European architecture and public sculpture, and have since carried 
powerful aesthetical and political messages. They are also physical manifestations of 
collective representations, aspirations and destinies, and carry a different, more personal 
meaning for the generation that passed through the trauma of the war (Winter, 1995: 
79). According to Rowlands (2001: 144), war memorials should allow for the resolution 
of suffering within the community and validate personal sacrifices that should not be 
forgotten. They should also “show an acceptance that violence took place in a context 
where it is claimed that something was gained instead, and thus transform a sense of 
collective loss into an object of devotion and passion”. Lastly, they should “ensure 
that the dead are deified as part of that devotional logic and have become embodied 
in the idea of the collective which needs to recognize the debt and willingness to 
reciprocate” (ibid.).
The most characteristic aspects of many monuments, especially to the First World 
War, is often the tomb of the unknown soldier, which aimed to pay respect, in a physical 
and individualized form, to the enormous numbers of fallen soldiers whose bodies were 
left unrecognizable or that had disappeared without a trace. The tomb of the unknown 
soldier symbolized all the war casualties of a given nation and expressed recognition 
of their valorous deeds, while also enabling survivors to mourn individual anonymous 
soldiers in a physical location (Jezernik, Fikfak, 2018: 15). The closest manifestation 
of memory that the trail has to this notion is the Monument to the Executed Hostages 
in a part of the trail close to the main Ljubljana cemetery, the Žale.
War memorials are also a way in which discourse about war is disseminated to the 
public, as they embody certain sets of values and ideals that societies want to preserve 
Jernej Gregorač 
46 |     Traditiones
for the future (Abousnnouga, Machin, 2013: 1–3). For Barthes, three major carriers 
of connotations are architectural styles, material objects, and poses; while Panofsky 
mentions familiarity, iconography, and linking of objects with specific themes and 
symbolic values. Social relations in monuments are best communicated through 
elevation, angle of interaction, size, gaze of the statues, and the impression of distance 
or proximity, while the choice of materials, shape and surface also plays a role (ibid.: 
35–51). The trail itself was designed as a monument that is easily accessible and relies 
on the interaction with the public. It is a solid object, yet still organic and welcoming, 
which is enhanced by the choice of a macadam-paved walking surface.
Trail as a chain of memorials
Here we shall move to materiality on the trail, which is especially important with heritage 
sites such as the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship, as it generally affects people’s 
direct encounter with a place, and provides means for the recollection of memory. 
Monuments and memorials, especially those that are large, concrete, and strategically 
placed, are constructed and located with the intention of communicating specific rep-
resentations of the past and binding them to the material form of the present, by which 
they become places of politics and contestation (De Nardi, Drozdzewski, 2019: 433–434).
Construction of memorials is a well-established cultural practice where memorials can 
function as memory markers of deeds, have specific political and ideological messages, 
Figure 4. Hostage. Photo: Darko Gregorač, 2020.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 47
and mark celebration or mourning (Sørensen et al., 2019: 1–6). It is important to note 
that the design for the trail was first made by local students of architecture, and later 
followed by a national competition for the completion of the trail. This was common 
for Yugoslav monuments, which were mostly all created by Yugoslav sculptors, ar-
chitects and designers, many of whom have experienced the war themselves and were 
also active participants of the National Liberation Movement.
The monuments thus made were positioned on a thin line between art and propaganda, 
between negotiated past and utopian future. The Yugoslav state had a monopoly over 
monument production, which was so prominent that almost three monuments, memorials 
or sculptures per day were erected for the first sixteen years after the Second World 
War (Baillie, 2019: 183–189). In the late 1950s and early 1960s, Partisan veterans’ 
associations reports revealed that there was virtually no place in the country without at 
least one commemorative plaque in honour of somebody from the war (Karge, 2023: 
94). The war experience of the Partisan movement also influenced the shape of the 
monuments, as especially those that were centrally initiated as “important historical 
sites along the route of the Supreme Staff and the Central Committee during the war” 
(Karge, 2023: 103–104), became monumental sculptures. The trail, on the other hand, is 
still an impressive reminder of the city’s past, but its strength does not lie in dominant 
presence but in persistence, embodied in a way that marks the city without giving off 
an impression of an overt monument.
Although the trail does not have a central piece or cenotaph, it nevertheless boasts some 
highly recognizable physical elements. The most iconic are the octagonal memorial pillars, 
Figure 5. Octagonal memorial pillar. Photo: Jure Burnik, 2020.
Jernej Gregorač 
48 |     Traditiones
designed by the architect Vlasto Kopač. The first of these pillars were erected in 1959, 
and there are currently 102 of them distributed rather evenly along the trail at the ap-
proximate sites of the former pillboxes. They all have a distinctive feature in common, 
which is an engraved symbol of the barbed wire fence and the years 1942–1945, that 
clearly connect them to the memory of the Second World War. However, looking 
closely, one can see two other details that enhance their value as heritage and preserve 
them as monuments, not only to the events of the Second World War but also to the 
era in which they were built in.
The first is that they are all made of concrete and not of a more precious material, 
such as the “cold, heavy, and smooth marble” (Abousnnouga, Machin, 2013: 133) often 
used as a building material for monuments. This was probably a conscious material 
choice, as it embodies the ideas of progress, industrialisation and modernisation in 
the post-war years, all of which were important narratives of the socialist society in 
Slovenia and Yugoslavia at the time. The second, and probably an even more telling 
detail, is that each one is inscribed with the name of a different working collective or 
company that sponsored its placement. With this, the pillars offer unique insight into 
a part of Slovenian history under socialism, as many of these state-owned companies 
and collectives were once the pride of the developing socialist industry in the country, 
and almost none made it through the transition in the early 1990s – an experience 
not unknown to many former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The 
indication of their existence on the pillars is now often the only physical reminder that 
they ever existed in the nation’s history.
Besides those, there are many other, sometimes hidden remnants of the war along 
the trail, such as remnants of pillboxes, some of which have been renovated, newly 
erected ceremonial masts, and the five-pointed stars in the letter o of pot (Eng. trail) 
in the official trail and blaze markers.
Trail as a green ring
Visual memorial elements constitute an important part of the trail as a memorial 
landscape and possess a clear emotional component in the commemoration of war and 
resistance, however, the trail was designed as more than just that and was incorporated 
in the city’s urbanist plans, having been built by section since the mid-seventies until it 
was finally completed as a “green ring” in 1985.9 In the elaborate for the competition 
of the trail’s final design, the trail itself was presented as a framework to “conduct 
unique city values through the use of architecture as a cultural signifier of society in 
9 The choice of the colour green clearly indicates the ambitions to create the backbone for the new devel-
opment of green, garden, and recreational areas in the city (MK SZDL, 1984: 1).
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 49
space” (Odbor za Izgradnjo PST, 1984: 1). Because the route of the trail corresponds 
to the natural radial and concentric expansion of the city, they suggested it would be 
the generator of its future shape and development. It would also become a point where 
the urban meets the rural, and at the same time “a borderline and the city’s integral 
seam”. The outcome of this competition was successful, especially in regards to the 
creation of natural elements along the trail in the urban areas and their preservation in 
the natural environment (ibid.: 2–4). It is important to note that the goal here was not 
to preserve nature as it once was, but to purposefully curate it in a way that conveys a 
message that the horrors of the barbed wire were replaced with a greener, brighter future.
The trail traverses all the major neighbourhoods of the city, and its circular shape 
enables it to connect the residential and industrial districts to meadows, forest and 
agricultural surfaces, emphasising the richness of built and natural environments of 
the city. As such, the true value of the trail lies in the form of a prospective memory, 
an unfolding and ongoing relationship between the past, the present, and the future 
(Harvey, Wilkinson, 2019: 179).
During the building of the trail, a strong emphasis was especially on the preservation 
of the natural environment – curating and maintaining the trail in a way that enables the 
safekeeping of the newly established natural environment. This was also indicated in 
the Ljubljana City Council’s strategic spatial plan in 2010, which emphasizes the trail 
in the city’s “upgrade of existing urban areas, supplementing of existing infrastructure, 
Figure 6. Trail in the city. Photo: Jernej Gregorač, 2024.
Jernej Gregorač 
50 |     Traditiones
and encouragement of sustainable use of space and maintenance of green surfaces” 
(MOL, 2010: 11382). The trail now contains the longest tree avenues in the city, with 
more than seven thousand trees planted alongside it. The Green Ring Association manages 
the planting of trees in collaboration with a professional dendrologist, who carefully 
selects the types of trees and takes care that they are planted with enough space between 
them so that they can fully develop. Some trees are planted by prominent individuals, 
ambassadors and heads of states, and are set in a special area called the Friendship 
Park (Sln. Park Prijateljstva), however, anyone can plant a tree for a donation. The 
focus of the creation and management of the trail has since its very beginning been an 
eco-centric one, as it focused on the community level, on maintenance of the local and 
communal wellbeing, and on harmonious use of resources (Baker, 2006: 28), which 
indicates a strong emphasis on sustainability as part of managing the trail as heritage.
The trail is also a good example of how heritage can be used as a tool for involving 
and empowering communities and recognising social value (Clark, 2008: 82–92). 
Cultural heritage often relies on active local communities, both amateurs such as the 
Green Ring Association on the example of the trail, and professionals working with 
authorities on a daily basis in the conservation, maintenance, and interpretation of 
historic structures and cultural landscapes (Barthel-Bouchier, 2013: 190).
Community involvement and participation are essential for the promotion of sus-
tainable development, as they foster democratic engagement, ecological practices, and 
the advocating of certain values. However, this can also bring along specific setbacks, 
such as who decides who gets to set the agenda, or the promotion of narrow interests 
(Baker, 2006: 41–45). The Ljubljana city authorities were fortunately open for sug-
gestions from groups engaged in preserving the memory of the war. This shows that 
although certain state-sponsored narratives were integral for the build-up of official 
ideology, some socialist regimes were open for the motions from below, and were 
also willing to listen to and include the participants in all stages of the process, from 
planning to construction.
Besides community engagement, successfully managing cultural heritage on an 
example such as the trail also includes respect of the natural environment, conservation 
of the material forms, safeguarding of the intangible heritage, and the promotion of 
creative practices that make places meaningful to local communities over time. Such 
acknowledgement of interactions between culture and nature, people and the envi-
ronment, and between tangible and intangible manifestations of heritage is in general 
relevant in the development of the concept of cultural landscapes for the World Heritage 
listing (Vahtikari, 2017: 47). It is also important not to neglect inclusivity in the face 
of pressures from economic development that has accompanied rapid urbanisation 
(Hosagrahar, 2018: 69–71).
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 51
Movement as engagement with the trail
Movement is still the most common way to experience the trail, and it is precisely 
movement that is celebrated on the trail as a triumph over the limitations of the barbed 
wire fence during the occupation. In order to break with the trauma of these events that 
took place in the city during the Second World War, the creators wished to promote 
the trail as an open and accessible space, and conceptualized it in such a way.
Practical experience embodied through walking is also indistinguishable from the 
cultural and symbolical meanings behind it (Wylie, 2002: 443), while the affect achieved 
through walking denotes the shifting moods, colour or intensity of places and situations. 
Walking through a memorial landscape in particular also has connotations to religious 
practices and dimensions, especially through the element of searching for something 
intangible. While secular walking is imagined as playful and efficient, pilgrimages often 
try to make the journey harder, demanding suffering and even sacrifice (Solnit, 2002: 
45–58). Such movement has a profound symbolic value, as the intangible notion of 
memory materializes itself through this practice (ibid.: 72–76).
The manifestation of remembrance on the trail today is an organized commemo-
rative march, colloquially known as the March Along the Barbed Wire Fence (Sln. 
Pohod – Pot ob Žici), that symbolically connects the past with the present and takes 
Figure 7. Planting of a new tree. Photo: Jernej Gregorač, 2024.
Jernej Gregorač 
52 |     Traditiones
place every Saturday closest to the 9th of May to celebrate the liberation of the city 
in 1945.10 Yearly commemorations, such as this one, often “draw together national 
identity, collective and individual memory, grief and mourning, regular ritual, and 
material, aesthetic representations of war and death” (Sumartojo, 2016: 541). Col-
lective portrayals of memory often seek to collectivise individual memories into an 
imagined community of the nation to the extent that the portrayal of the national pasts 
in monuments and memorials has become synonymous with the symbolic transmission 
of national identity. In this regard, commemorations have become mnemonic techniques 
for localising collective memory and making the national narrative visible in the public 
space (Drozdzewski, 2016a: 19–20).
The march is today promoted as a commemorative, recreational, and sporting event 
and has been listed under the Registry of Intangible Heritage of Slovenia in 2016 as “a 
march along the route of a historical monument that connects the city’s experience of 
the Second World War to modern challenges, such as healthy lifestyle and recreation. 
This well-visited annual event helps maintain the memory and form the identity of the 
city” (MK RS, 2016: 3). The annual march also “encourages the people to an active 
and healthy way of life, socializing on the trail, and care for the environment in which 
they live in” (MK RS, 2016: 1).
The central commemoration has evolved during the years and was in the beginning 
shaped by the ideals, narratives and realities of the Yugoslav socialism. At its outset 
the march was a true test of comradeship and endurance. The participants in the first 
march in 1957, an event sponsored by the Second World War Veterans’ Association, 
had to carry twelve kilograms of equipment per person, including a Mauser rifle, and 
were grouped in teams. In 1958 the participants also had to shoot at a target, while, 
like in a biathlon, points were deducted for each missed shot.
In this aspect, the event has changed over the years but is still divided into the 
actual march that is open to everyone and to an accompanying run, which has a more 
competitive and athletic note.11 By this, it is both a commemorative as well as a sporting 
event, with more than 30,000 people participating annually. It takes place over three 
days, as kindergarteners open it on a first Thursday in May, schoolchildren march on 
a Friday, while the central march and run take place on a Saturday. Each participant 
receives a commemorative pin, while those who manage to walk the full circle receive 
a commemorative medal.12
Even outside of the official ceremony, movement is the best indicator on how the 
trail is not relying solely on the memorial component and has adapted to contemporary 
times. It is considered a popular destination for runners and hikers, a recreational space, 
10 This date is nowadays also celebrated as Europe Day.
11 To reflect the cooperative spirit of the Slovenian Partisans, the participants run in groups of three and the 
results count when the final member of the group crosses the finish line.
12 I currently have six, being no stranger to the trail personally.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 53
Figure 8. Commemorative medal. Photo: Jure Burnik, 2020.
Figure 9. Exercise area on the trail. Photo: Jure Burnik, 2020.
Jernej Gregorač 
54 |     Traditiones
and a transit route for cyclists. In practical terms this means that it encompasses carefully 
placed exercise spots, picnic tables, benches and water fountains, while it is also ac-
companied by bicycle lanes alongside it. It is a democratic space in the sense that it 
allows everybody to choose their own tempo and level of engagement with heritage.
During the research, I wanted to see how local people perceive the trail and what 
it means to them. The results were interesting in a sense that the older participants 
seemed to have a stronger emotional connection to the heritage experience of the trail 
outside exclusively officially recognised heritage narratives of the trail. For them, the 
connection was also manifested through stronger feelings of nostalgia and the impact of 
personal or familial memories of the Second World War, and generally through broader 
knowledge on the topic. On the other hand, the younger participants emphasized the 
recreational and socialising aspects of the trail, but some of them also expressed the 
wish that there would be more informational content on the history of the space. All of 
the participants agreed that the trail is an important part of the heritage of the city, and 
especially during the recent global pandemic was a space associated with the freedom 
of movement. With this in mind, we can see that even though the commemoration is 
integral to the official narrative of the trail, its real power lies in the incorporation of 
movement as a part of the city’s history, fabric, and the living environment.
Conclusion
Through the elements of memory, materiality, and movement on the Trail of Remem-
brance and Comradeship in Ljubljana we can explore how a place of heritage and 
memory can be created, and how it can be maintained in a contemporary setting and 
in a way that reflects the generational, political, and environmental changes. It is not 
solely an officially recognised monument in the city, but is at the same time the city’s 
largest heritage surface, its connective vein and a “green ring”. Not used exclusively 
for the commemorative purpose listed under the Registry of Intangible Heritage of 
Slovenia, it is yet a silent and unobtrusive, though persistent reminder of the past, a 
multi-layered heritage phenomenon.
The trail has its origins in the preservation of the memory and the experience of the 
Second World War in Ljubljana, but has later been adapted to new challenges within 
the city and the society. The way in which the trail was designed by the people who 
experienced the war and were connected to the resistance movement shows that the 
intention here was not only to glorify and memorise a tragic event of the past, but to 
channel this traumatic experience and actively defy it. The symbol of the barbed wire 
fence, this general element of limitation of movement, has been transformed into a 
place that perpetually celebrates and promotes movement and symbolically breaks the 
constraints of the barbed wire fence.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 55
Furthermore, the trail is also a monument of the socialist past in Slovenia, to the 
way how historical narratives were manifested in that period, what this society valued 
back then, and how it took on the task of presenting it as heritage. In that sense, it 
embodies a powerful memory that is used as a literal journey into a specific cultural 
history of a place (MacDonald, 2012: 245). I have also not encountered such a level 
of engagement with the natural environment, albeit curated, in any other war memorial 
site during my research, which is a good indicator that the trail as a heritage site has 
been well devised in this regard. The construction and management of the trail can 
be considered an example of good practice of how the authorities can cooperate with 
associations from the community and rely on cooperative actions and volunteer work. 
Of course, some doubts might be connected to the intentions and ideological narrative 
behind the construction of such monuments during the socialist period in Yugoslavia, 
but we also have to bear in mind that the official documents connected to its creation 
clearly state that the trail is also a monument of “curated nature” (MK SZDL, 1985: 
2), and that the expansion of potential of memory to forge identities in this manner 
has its roots in the rise of the nineteenth century nationalism (Sutcliffe et al., 2018: 8).
Finally, because of its multiple tangible and intangible heritage layers, the trail is a 
good example of heritage as a process, a meaning, and a relationship. It also presents 
us with possibilities of how heritage spaces can become generators of added contents 
in the changing city environments. It is a space of the people and for the people to 
celebrate the city’s past, as well as a place for newer generations to create their own 
memories, engage with the history of the city through everyday activities outside of the 
“official” commemorative occasions, and to effectively march on the memory of the city.
References
Abousnnouga, Gill and David Machin. 2013. The Language of War Monuments. London: 
Continuum Publishing.
Assmann, Jan. 1995. Collective Memory and Cultural Identity. New German Critique 65: 125–133. 
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/488538. 
Baillie, Britt. 2019. The Dudik Memorial Complex: Commemoration and Changing Regimes in 
the Contested City of Vukovar. In Memorials in the Aftermath of Armed Conflict: From 
History to Heritage, eds. Marie Louise Stig Sørensen, Dacia Viejo-Rose, and Paola 
Filippucci, 183–227. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Baker, Susan. 2006. Sustainable Development. London: Routledge.
Barthel-Bouchier, Diane. 2013. Cultural Heritage and the Challenge of Sustainability. Walnut 
Creek: Left Coast Press.
Carter, Thomas, David C. Harvey, Roy Jones, and Iain J. M. Robertson. 2020. Introduction. In 
Creating Heritage: Unrecognised Pasts and Rejected Futures, eds. Thomas Carter, David 
C. Harvey, Roy Jones, and Iain J. M. Robertson, 1–15. London: Routledge.
Jernej Gregorač 
56 |     Traditiones
Clark, Kate 2008. Only Connect – Sustainable Development and Cultural Heritage. In The 
Heritage Reader, eds. Graham Fairclough, Rodney Harrison, John H. Jameson Jr., and 
John Schofield, 82–98. New York: Routledge.
Connerton, Paul. 1989. How Societies Remember. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Connerton, Paul. 2008. Seven Types of Forgetting. Memory Studies 1 (1): 59–71.
De Nardi, Sarah and Danielle Drozdzewski. 2019. Landscape and Memory. In The Routledge 
Companion to Landscape Studies, eds. Peter Howard, Ian Thompson, Emma Waterton, 
and Mick Atha, 429–439. London: Routledge.
Drozdzewski, Danielle, Sarah De Nardi, and Emma Waterton. 2016a. The Significance of Memory 
in the Present. In Memory, Place and Identity: Commemoration and Remembrance of War 
and Conflict, eds. Danielle Drozdzewski, Sarah De Nardi, and Emma Waterton, 1–16. 
London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685168. 
Drozdzewski, Danielle, Sarah de Nardi, and Emma Waterton. 2016b. Geographies of Memory, 
Place and Identity: Intersections in Remembering War and Conflict. Geography Compass 
10 (11): 447–456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12296. 
Edensor, Tim. 2010. Geographies of Rhythm: Nature, Place, Mobilities and Bodies. London: 
Routledge.
Harrison, Rodney. 2013. Heritage: Critical Approaches. New York: Routledge.
Harvey, David and Timothy J. Wilkinson. 2019. Landscape and Heritage: Emerging Landscapes 
of Heritage. In The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies, eds. Peter Howard, Ian 
Thompson, Emma Waterton, and Mick Atha, 176–191. London: Routledge.
Hoelscher, Michael. 2011. Indicator Suites for Heritage, Memory, Identity. In Cultures and 
Globalization: Heritage, Memory and Identity, eds. Helmut Anheier and Yudhishthir 
Raj Isar, 287–296. London: SAGE.
Horvatinčić, Sanja and Beti Žerovc, eds. 2023. Shaping Revolutionary Memory. Ljubljana: Igor 
Zabel Association for Culture and Theory.
Hosagrahar, Jyoti. 2018. Inclusive Social Development and World Heritage in Urban Areas. 
In World Heritage and Sustainable Development: New Directions in World Heritage 
Management, eds. Peter Bille Larsen and William Logan, 68–86. London: Routledge.
Ingold, Tim. 2011. Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. London: 
Routledge.
Jezernik, Božidar and Jurij Fikfak. 2018. Cultural Heritage of the Great War. Traditiones 47 (1): 
7–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/Traditio2. 
Karge, Heike. 2023. Local Practices and “Memory from Above”: On the Building of War 
Monuments in Yugoslavia. In Shaping Revolutionary Memory, eds. Sandra Horvatinčić 
and Beti Žerovc, 85–91. Ljubljana: Igor Zabel Association for Culture and Theory.
Kerševan, Nuša. 2020. Interview with the Author, January 15, 2020.
Kolešnik, Ljiljana. 2023. Cultural Models and Cultural Policies in Socialist Yugoslavia. In Shaping 
Revolutionary Memory, eds. Sandra Horvatinčić and Beti Žerovc, 85–91. Ljubljana: Igor 
Zabel Association for Culture and Theory.
Kos, Janez. 2006. Pot spominov in tovarištva: 50 spominskih pohodov. Ljubljana: Društvo zeleni 
prstan.
Kranjc, Gregor Joseph. 2015. To Walk with the Devil: Slovene Collaboration and Axis Occupation, 
1941–1945. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Lowenthal, David. 1998. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 57
Lowenthal, David. 2015. The Past is a Foreign Country: Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press.
MacDonald, Sharon. 2012. Presencing Europe’s Pasts. In A Companion to the Anthropology of 
Europe, eds. Ullrich Kockel, Máiréad Nic Craith, and Jonas Frykman, 233–252. London: 
Blackwell.
MK RS – Ministrstvo za kulturo Republike Slovenije. 2016. Opis enote žive kulturne dediščine. 
Ljubljana: Register nesnovne kulturne dediščine.
MK SZDL – Mestna konferenca Socialistične zveze delovnega ljudstva. 1984. Zadeva: Dogovor 
o zasaditvi drevoreda ob Poti spominov in tovarištva. Ljubljana: SZDL.
MK SZDL – Mestna konferenca Socialistične zveze delovnega ljudstva. 1985. Obvestilo občinskim 
skupščinam. Ljubljana: SZDL.
MOL – Mestna občina Ljubljana. 2010. Odlok o občinskem prostorskem načrtu Mestne občine 
Ljubljana – strateški del. Uradni list 78: 11381–11440.
Nora, Pierre. 1989. Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire. Representations 26: 7–24.
Odbor za izgradnjo PST. 1984. Utemeljitev zasnove sistema zelenega prostora mesta v kontekstu 
Poti spominov in tovarištva. Ljubljana: MK SZDL.
Osborne, Brian S. 2018. Reflecting on the Great War 1914–2019: How Has It Been Defined, How 
Was It Commemorated, How Should It Be Remembered. In Commemorative Spaces of 
the First World War: Historical Geographies at the Centenary, eds. James Wallis and 
David Harvey, 209–224. London: Routledge.
Pink, Sarah. 2007. Doing Visual Ethnography. London: SAGE.
Reeves, Keir. 2018. Sites of Memory. In History, Memory and Public Life: The Past in the Present, 
eds. Anna Maerker, Simon Sleight, and Adam Sutcliffe, 65–79. London: Routledge.
Repe, Božo. 2020. Interview with the Author, January 14, 2020.
Rogelja Caf, Nataša and Špela Ledinek Lozej. 2023. Hodopisi: Zbirka etnografskih esejev z 
metodološkimi premisleki o hoji in pisanju. Ljubljana: ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC.
Rowlands, Michael. 2001. Remembering to Forget: Sublimation as Sacrifice in War Memorials. 
In The Art of Forgetting, eds. Adrian Forty and Susanne Küchler, 129–145. Oxford: Berg.
Shanahan, Madeline and Brian Shanahan. 2017. Commemorating Melbourne’s Past: Constructing 
and Contesting Space, Time and Public Memory in Contemporary Parkspaces. In 
Contemporary Archaeology and the City: Creativity, Ruination, and Political Action, 
eds. Laura McAtackney and Krysta Ryzewski, 1–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shepherd Nick, Christian Ernsten, and Dirk-Jan Visser. 2018. The Walking Seminar: Embodied 
Research in Emergent Anthropocene Landscapes. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University 
of the Arts. 
Solnit, Rebecca. 2002. Wanderlust: A History of Walking. London: Granta.
Sørensen, Marie Louise Stig and Dacia Viejo-Rose. 2015. Introduction: The Impact of Conflict on 
Cultural Heritage. In War and Cultural Heritage: Biographies of Place, eds. Marie Louise 
Stig Sørensen and Dacia Viejo-Rose, 1–17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Sørensen, Marie Louise Stig, Dacia Viejo-Rose, and Paola Filippucci. 2019. Memorials and 
Memorialisation: History, Forms and Affects. In Memorials in the Aftermath of Armed 
Conflict: From History to Heritage, eds. Marie Louise Stig Sørensen, Dacia Viejo Rose, 
and Paola Filippucci, 1–32. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sumartojo, Shanti. 2016. Commemorative Atmospheres: Memorial Sites, Collective Events and 
the Experience of National Identity. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 
41 (4): 541–553.
Jernej Gregorač 
58 |     Traditiones
Sutcliffe, Adam, Anna Maerker, and Simon Sleight. 2018. Introduction: Memory, Public Life and 
the Work of the Historian. In History, Memory and Public Life the Past in the Present, 
eds. Anna Maerker, Simon Sleight, and Adam Sutcliffe, 1–25. London: Routledge.
Vahtikari, Tanja. 2017. Valuing World Heritage Cities. New York: Routledge.
Vurnik Blaž. 2020. Interview with the Author, January 21, 2020.
Winter, Jay. 1995. Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural 
History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Winter, Jay. 2006. Remembering War: The Great War Between Memory and History in the 
Twentieth Century. New Haven: Yale.
Wylie, John. 2002. An Essay on Ascending Glastonbury Tor. Geoforum 33: 441–454.
Hoja s spomini: dediščina na Poti spominov in tovarištva v Ljubljani
V članku avtor z izhodišča dediščinskih študij predstavi spominsko pot, Pot 
spominov in tovarištva (PST), v Ljubljani. V spomin na to, da je bila Ljubljana 
v drugi svetovni vojni obdana z bodečo žico, je pot spomenik, ki popolnoma 
obkroža mesto. Je del tako snovne kot nesnovne dediščine mesta, saj po njej 
poteka pohod v spomin na vojne dogodke, danes pa je zaradi urejenosti postala 
tudi del mesta, ki ga prebivalci dnevno uporabljajo tudi v namene, ki niso ne-
posredno povezani z ohranjanjem tega spomina.
Izhodišča raziskave so spomin, materialnost in gibanje, povezani z dediščino, 
ki jo pot predstavlja za mesto, in vprašanja, kako so se v času socializma v 
Sloveniji ustvarjale dediščinske površine v prostoru in spominskem tkivu lokalnih 
skupnosti ter kako se z dodajanjem novih vsebin takšni prostori lahko ohranijo 
tudi, ko zbledijo osebni spomini na dogodke, ki jih spomeniki zaznamujejo.
Podlaga za raziskavo je bila literatura o spominu in dediščini, vojnih spo-
menikih, nesnovnih komemoracijah spominskih dogodkov v javnem prostoru 
ter o neposrednem izkustvu dediščine oz. gibanju po njej. Po zasnovi je pot 
spomenik, ki povezuje snovno z nesnovno dediščino, zato omogoča raziskave 
obeh področij.
Po kratkem zgodovinskem orisu druge svetovne vojne v Ljubljani, avtor 
najprej postavi pot kot spomenik v širši kontekst teorij o vlogi spomina v 
dediščini. V nadaljevanju sledi predstavitev procesa dediščinjenja poti, ki je v 
grobem potekalo od leta 1957, ko je bil na poti izveden prvi dogodek v spomin 
na čas, ko je mesto bilo obdano z bodečo žico, do leta 2016, ko je bil pohod 
ob žici vpisan v slovenski register nesnovne kulturne dediščine. Pomembna 
prelomnica pri tem je tudi leto 1985, ko je pot kot sklenjena celota popolnoma 
obkrožila Ljubljano ter postala priznana kot spomenik.
Marching on Memory: Heritage of the Trail of Remembrance and Comradeship in Ljubljana
Traditiones     | 59
Naslednji poglavji se dotikata materialnosti poti oz. poti kot fizičnega 
spomenika, ki je celota več spomenikov – spomenik na vojno, spomenik družbi 
in spomenik socialistični Sloveniji v socialistični Jugoslaviji. Pri tem se avtor 
opre predvsem na literaturo o vojnih spomenikih, s posebnim poudarkom na 
jugoslovanskih, med katere se uvršča tudi ljubljanska pot.
Pot pa je več kot zgolj fizični spomenik. Že ob nastajanju je bila zarisana v 
urbanistične načrte mesta. Zaradi dreves, ki so jih od 70. let prejšnjega stoletja 
načrtno sadili ob njej, se je uveljavila tudi kot »zeleni obroč«, ki prebivalcem 
nudi dostopno zeleno površino in predvsem na posebej pogozdovanih delih tudi 
neposredni stik z naravo. Kot taka je tudi zgled ustvarjanja trajnostno usmerjene 
kulturne dediščine.
V zadnjem poglavju avtor analizira pot kot del dediščine mesta še z vidika 
elementa gibanja in je pozoren predvsem na vsakoletni majski pohod, ki praznuje 
osvoboditev mesta v maju 1945. Pohod je dobro obiskan dogodek, pri katerem 
se prepletata ohranjanje spomina in rekreativni značaj. Avtor poudari pomen 
gibanja pri zaznavanju in vrednotenju dediščine. S tem se sklene krog analize z 
elementi spomina, materialnosti in gibanja ter poudari spoznanje, da dediščina 
lahko preseže svoje snovne razsežnosti, ko se z njo ustvarja odnos skupnosti 
do preteklosti.