kenman

I have some business in London in early October, and plan to add a couple of days on either end (maybe 2 before, 3 after). Have always wanted to visit both Bath and Edinburgh/the Highlands/Skye, but I can't decide if it makes sense to try to do both, or to give up Bath entirely and roll all 5 nights into Scotland. What do you think? If Bath does go down the drain (heh heh), what's your suggested itinerary for Scotland?

Underhill

My heart's in the highlands.

janisj

If you really want to do both you can fit them in. It would be fairly hectic but definitely doable. Go to Bath on the front end before your London business. Then afterwards you can either take the sleeper train from London to Inverness -- or -- you can fly from Gatwick to Inverness.

I'd probably choose the sleeper myself. You'd leave Euston Station late in the evening and arrive in Inverness early the next morning. You could hit the ground running. W/ 3 full days up north you have lots of choices - what sorts of things do you want to see/do?

kenman

We'll have our young daughter with us, so it will be more about the ambience than any particular sights. Oban and Skye have always beckoned, and it looks like a flight out of Glasgow would work. Would it be too much to train into Edinburgh, spend a night there, rent a car and cruise to Skye for a night, then do one more night in Oban and leave to catch a flight from Glasgow? Hmm, sounding hectic even as I write it. And I suspect Edinburgh really merits more than one night?

kenman

And Underhill: I've often found myself agreeing with your posts on Provence, so I'm curious about your comment. I take it the highlands are a similarly special place?

janisj

my initial post was re your title wanting to see the highlands. Edinburgh and Oban are not in or anywhere near the highlands. And you are talking about October when the days are getting shorter and the weather is getting more iffy. Edinburgh / Skye / Oban is not a 3 day trip - Even in the summer when it is light until 11PM.

So - If you want to see Edinburgh (you could still do the sleeper train) and a bit of countryside - you can do 2 nights in Edinburgh and 1 night somewhere in the triangle of Perth/Stirling/Crianlarich (look at a map of Scotland - this is about the very center of the country). Or vice versa w/ 1 night in Edinburgh and 2 nights in the countryside.

stfc

You are asking which is better out of black or white. Historical cities, attractive to tourists, surrounded by delightful green countryside or more spectacular scenery with less in the way of tourist facilities if it rains, which is very likely. I don't think you can mix "Edinburgh/the Highlands/Skye" in your timescale. I suggest you choose one place or area from your list and go and enjoy it.

traveller1959

Your alternative is little bit like, say, "Seattle or California".

To be frank, Bath IS attractive, but just for half a day (I have been there last Friday). The reconstructed Roman baths ARE spectacular and, carefully listening to the audioguide, you may spend there 2 hours. Another 1/4 hour in the abbey and 2 minutes to see the Georgian houses (and much more time to get there). In addition to that, maybe the American Museum.

On the other hand, Scotland is a whole country. Edinburgh alone has enough attractions to spend at least two full days there, and in close vicinity you find a wealth of other interesting places (Rosslyn Chapel, Culross, Inchmahome Priory, the Trossachs, Stirling Castle..).

If you want to combine town & landscape there are two options:

1) Spend half a day in Bath and drive further to North Devon/Exmoor Natl. Park. You will find spectacular coastal scenery as well as moor landscape. On the way, there are many other places of interest: Oxford, Cotswold villages...

2) Spend 2 days in Edinburgh and one day for a round trip to the Trossachs, Loch Lomond and maybe Loch Tay to get an impression of highland scenery.

utrechtman

In my opinion: try to do both Bath and Edinburgh. Both places are outstanding to visit. Bath for it's beauty, cathedral, roman baths, shops, etc. And Edinburgh is a most beautiful city with so much to offer the traveler. however, if i had to make a choice, then edinburgh would be it, but consider staying over night. it's too much to take in in just one day due to travel time from london by rail. I did a day trip in 2002 and regret not having more time to take in more!

zippo

No you are trying to do too much and will spend most of your time in transit. You might enjoy trying to sleep on a train but dont depend on it.
Also note - although janisj is technically correct in that Oban is
outside "The Highlands" the Scots dont think of it that way - the scenery is highland, it takes 2.5 hours slowish drive from Glasgow through highland scenery or half an hour on the seaplane from the city. From there you can take a ferry to a small island.

caroline_edinburgh

Everything Janis said, except I can't agree about the sleeper. You wouldn't hit the ground running as you would not have had a shower. If you're going to Edinburgh, I recommend the normal train or flying (I always fly nowadays as I find it quicker, more convenient and cheaper); if Inverness, definitely fly.

y10vne

In many ways Bath and Edinburgh are similar in architectural terms (wonderful ancient and Georgian). Edinburgh is a lot bigger and a lot more fun with major cultural and entertainment options.
There is an excellent cheap-maybe £30 ish if you book early, 'easyjet' flight from Bristol Airport (30 minutes from Bath)to Edinburgh. Far easier, cheaper and quicker than a train from London.
Anywhere in the Highlands can be dodgy in weather terms in October. And the major reason for going is the scenery and outdoor sports, so unless you are really into castles/history, scenery and sport stick to Bath and Edinburgh. Go in the summer to the Highlands- May/June and Sept are best.