Talk:The Broomway

Picture
This article would greatly benefit from a picture of one or two brooms, to give an indication of their appearance. Are any still in situ - or does anybody out there have any open-source pictures they could upload? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 13:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The brooms are no longer there and I suspect they've been gone for at least a century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.146.117 (talk) 05:19, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have found a public domain article which has a (poorly reproduced) photo of the Broomway including some of the brooms, dating from the early 20th century. The brooms were surprisingly small and squat, with what looked a small, foot-high bundle of twigs sticking out of the mud. I'll try and add a copy soon.


 * I've seen written evidence that a few brooms were still in situ around 1940 Svejk74 (talk) 21:41, 8 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Picture now added.Svejk74 (talk) 14:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Why?
It's fascinating that this dangerous, soggy way was ever considered a viable route to Foulness, and that anyone would choose it (as opposed to, say, taking a rowboat the short distance across Havengore Creek), let alone expend resources on the construction of the six headways. What were they thinking? GPS Pilot (talk) 08:29, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Another why: Why didn't the track hug the high-tide mark more? Surely that would have been a lot safer? Also, after the split of the creek, both branches are at points less than 50 m wide. That's still a lot, and building a wooden footbridge would have been expensive... but they managed to find the resources to build the headways. Or they could have installed a rope-guided foot ferry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.146.117 (talk) 05:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Much of the farmland on Foulness was reclaimed from marshland in the 16th-18th century, so the flat, firm sand of the Broomway would have actually been a better passage. There's also a school of thought that it's a route dating from a time before mediaeval storm surges inundated a lot of the coastline.


 * Another thing to remember is that while the whole 'dangerous' angle is foregrounded in modern articles (and indeed the Broomway is now very dangerous indeed for the average person without a guide, particularly as the brooms have now gone), for pre 1920s residents of Foulness the sands were an everyday part of their lives - they set up fish traps on them, travelled back and forth on them etc, even at night. They had a very high level of knowledge and respect and in this context the Broomway was an entirely practical route compared to trying to get a cart and horse through miles of marshland.


 * As for why the track didn't hug the shore, it's because there was softer mud there. Svejk74 (talk) 21:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

© ??
The photo loaded in Wikimedia should not be copyrigthed ? --Pascal Boulerie (talk) 16:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The photo attributed to an individual has now been replaced by a better one from Geograph.Svejk74 (talk) 14:58, 9 February 2017 (UTC)