This article argues that the traditional retail market-a ubiquitous commercial feature of British towns and cities-produced a particular strand of heritage politics in late 1960s and early 1970s Britain. In recovering the activists involved in two campaigns to 'save the market' from redevelopment-one unsuccessful campaign in Bradford and one successful campaign in Chesterfield-I make the case for thinking through local urban heritage movements in comparative terms, focusing on how place-based citizenship collided with a nascent, national 'anti-development' mood in the early 1970s. The campaigns in Bradford and Chesterfield defended the transhistorical 'publicness' of the retail market-its spatial centrality, its collective ownership, and its relief of town or city rates-as a critique of contemporary, undemocratic privatization of communal space. Combining the archives of civic amenity, community action, and heritage societies with subjective attitudes towards preservation and redevelopment found in local 'letters to the editor' pages, this article reads the market as one physical nexus where local 'politics' and 'publics' collided and permutated in early 1970s provincial Britain. This focus on the lived heritage of socio-economic place has bearing on public history, the history of urban social movements, and architecture and planning historiography.

中文翻译：

---

作为民主行动的商业遗产：将布拉德福德和切斯特菲尔德的“拯救市场”运动历史化，1969-76

本文认为，传统零售市场——英国城镇无处不在的商业特征——在 1960 年代末和 70 年代初的英国产生了一种特殊的遗产政治。在恢复参与两项“拯救市场”运动的积极分子时——布拉德福德的一场不成功的运动和切斯特菲尔德的一场成功的运动——我提出了从比较的角度思考当地城市遗产运动的理由，重点是如何以地方为基础1970 年代初，公民身份与新生的国家“反发展”情绪发生冲突。布拉德福德和切斯特菲尔德的运动捍卫了零售市场的超历史“公共性”——它的空间中心性、集体所有权以及城镇或城市费率的减免——作为对当代的批判，公共空间的不民主私有化。将公民设施、社区行动和遗产协会的档案与当地“给编辑的信”页面中发现的对保护和重建的主观态度相结合，本文将市场解读为当地“政治”和“公众”发生冲突的一个物理纽带并在 1970 年代初的不列颠省进行排列。这种对社会经济场所生活遗产的关注与公共历史、城市社会运动的历史以及建筑和规划史学有关。这篇文章将市场解读为一个物理纽带，在 1970 年代早期的英国省级地方“政治”和“公众”发生碰撞和排列。这种对社会经济场所生活遗产的关注与公共历史、城市社会运动的历史以及建筑和规划史学有关。这篇文章将市场解读为一个物理纽带，在 1970 年代早期的英国省级，地方“政治”和“公众”在这里发生碰撞和排列。这种对社会经济场所生活遗产的关注与公共历史、城市社会运动的历史以及建筑和规划史学有关。