Perth or Stirling
 

My husband and I will be in Scotland for 5 days/nights in June-we are flying into Edinburgh and out of Glasgow and are not renting a car. We like good pubs and history and are not so crazy about shopping or very touristy areas. We are spending the first 3 nights in Edinburgh and the last (5th) in Glasgow. We are trying to determine where to spend our 4th night (in between the two cities). Both Perth and Stirling seem to be good options and both are easily reached by public transport--is one very preferable to the other? Thank you very much in advance for any advice.

I liked them both but if you must choose just one, Stirling has a bit more to see - castle, Wallace Monument etc. Very historic and only slightly touristy.

Stirling is my recommendation but then I am biased. Our website has information about what to see and do in Stirling : www.kilronan.co.uk

Here is a third vote for Stirling. And it is pretty easy to visit without a car.

Keith

Sallyanne,

I would also prefer Stirling (+ Dunblane). There are good train services to Stirling from both Glasgow and Edinburgh which take less than an hour so relocation there is not really essential. If you have not visited Glasgow before I would suggest you consider spending more than one night there.

Michael

Stilring's better than perth for what you're seeking (you have no idea what it cost me to type that!!), but think about Falkland, St Andrews, Melrose, Linlithgow, Kinross or Culross

difficult question really but I'd like to live in stirling one day so thats my vote