So flanner - what area would be the best for Tudor relics? thanks

WOW! Thank you to all for the wonderful and informative responses.

I like the ideas that have been presented to us. We are definitely going in March and we don't mind the cold. We have found it not to be any colder than where we live in the States at that time of year. Plus I know that it is not a "touristy" season in March.

We are not dead set about visiting "Tudor" architecture. We are interested in visiting stately homes, castles in ruins or other places of historical interest. We have been to Hampton Court Palace, Canterbury and the York Minster before. I mostly would like to base our stay in a small city or village and experience that type of life for a little while. But yet be able to hop on a train (or 2) and get out of town for some fun day trips that aren't too far away as well.

I like the ideas of Cheltenham Spa or Oxford. I would imagine both would be OK without actually having a rental car? I am sure we could go that route, I just thought it would be easier to go by trains to most places. Maybe not though?

Does anyone have any thoughts on making Shrewsbury a good home base for this trip?

I've based in Shrewsbury twice and loved it

A really neat old town with a massive castle, great cathedral, etc.

We day tripped to nearby Ironbridge Gorge (fantastic heritage site of the Industrial Revolution which many say began here - lots of interesting relics from that age

and to a town just to the south i can't recall - either in Wales or on the Welsh border - lovely natural setting - fine cathedral and some highly touted restaurants - short train ride

and to Stoke-on-Trent to tour the Wedgwood factory - again a great experience

and you can also day trip into Wales from there - North Wales like to Conwy - another great castle - etc. Good train links from shrewsbury

Shrewsbury would make a fine base for a very wide area of England and Wales.

But just do realize few stately homes or ruins are in towns/villages, and for the most part they are not on rail lines.

Warwick, a few of the Welsh castles and such are easily reached by train. But if Stately homes/gardens and ruins are your main interests - then you'll have a difficult time relying on trains. A city stay - of course you won't need a car at all. But to explore the countryside what you can see will be limited.

I think PalenQ is referring to Welshpool. But this pretty much what is available throughout England. Nearly everyplace has a great nearby area with terrific stately homes, manors and gardens.

Chester is another good place as is Essex, Norfork and Suffolk.

My point is that there are places and ares to spend a week or more.

"what area would be the best for Tudor relics"

If you mean big, beefy individual buildings, there's a fair amount in Kent, which is why Kent's not a bad idea as long as you're happy not trying to get out of Kent. Otherwise, the greatest concentration, if you start the era ten years earlier, is the Thames Valley from Hampton Court, through Eton, Ewelme and Oxford to Fairford.

Hi
I was born and brought up in Suffolk and it is lovely (and much neglected by tourists) but it really doesn't have that good rail links so I really wouldn't contemplate it without a car.
I now live in North Yorkshire and would most definitely second York as your base if you don't have a car. There's the occasional nonsense written on here about 'the frozen north' but believe me I experienced more snow and colder winters down in Suffolk (and Essex where I also lived for some years)than I have ever had in North Yorkshire. March is often a beautiful time up here (you can't guarantee the weather anywhere). North Yorkshire was recently voted the most beautiful county in England and I would second that - to me it has everything. Friendly people, fabulous local food, stunning scenery ............I could go on.
http://www.york-england.com/general/...beautiful.html
And York itself has many beautiful Tudor buildngs too. You can even have a drink and a meal in some of them!
www.blackswanyork.co.uk
This website gives links to other Tudor buildings in York.
http://www.yorkhistoryinpictures.co....or_stuart.html
If the weather SHOULD be unkind there are loads of indoor things to do in York (don't miss the Railway Museum and The Minster, plus there are numerous museums). There are excellent rail links to Durham, Harrogate, Pickering, Whitby etc. Close by there is Fountains Abbey (World Heritage site). I could give you enough suggestions to keep you busy for months!
York city centre is compact and there's no need for a car, but if you did fancy renting one for a day or so then do head for the Yorkshire Dales.
Some other websites that might help if York appeals.
www.visityork.org
www.yorkshiredales.org.uk
www.fountainsabbey.org.uk
www.nymr.co.uk

flanneruk said:

"Except for Essex (of which the least said the better)"

For those not in the know perhaps you'd care to elaborate on that.

Essex is said to be the home of the chav - Burberry-wearing benefit claiming slackers. Girls wear white stilettos and are called 'Tracy'. Blokes drive souped up Corsas or Citroen Saxos with subwoofers louder than Concorde. People speak Estuary English, live in mock tudor houses (if they are well off) or some dodgy council estate in Basildon or Southend if not. Allegedly.

Actually Essex has some quite pretty villages, particularly the bits bordering Suffolk. I would say it also has better transport links than Kent, though I still wouldn't recommend it as a tourist base.

While we're on the subject, why does Kent keep coming up as a convenient 'base' for visiting London or the rest of the UK? It's right in the corner of England all by itself, and the rail links are still crap, which is why you can still get a 4-bed house in Ramsgate for not much more than 100k. There are some lovely places to visit in that county, but accessible hub for trips round the country it is not.

&quot;<i>While we're on the subject, why does Kent keep coming up as a convenient 'base' </i>&quot;

It keeps coming up as a good base w/ good rail connections because PQ has some sort of fixation w/ the place. He keeps telling folks it is easy to get around Kent and from there to other places. Then there his &quot;Kent&quot; thread that may be the longest soliloquy in the history of Fodors ( :$ he sniffs paint - doncha know ;) )

&quot;PQ...keeps telling folks it is easy to get from Kent... to other places&quot;


He doesn't. Granted, when he's been on the Focus DIY Eggshell White it's not always that easy to know what he's saying. But on this thread, he's just saying Kent's a great base for Kent, and a couple of adjacent places like Battle.

And he's right. The railway system in Kent is kind of a semi-rural metro. For a certain sort of tourist, it's a great place to spend a car-free week. Trouble is: 1. You really need a bike to get from the railway stations to the big stately homes, if they're your poison
2. It's a bugger getting anywhere else from Kent. Except Calais.

Ah wait until those Kent 'Sprinters' or whatever the trains on the new high-speed Chunnel rail link from Kent to St pancras are called - then a few minutes to one of London's major rail terminus - along with adjacent Kings Cross

saving for me

JHStubbs: Just to add to the confusion. Continental flies to Bristol and to Manchester, which by-passes Heathrow altogether, not a bad thing. Last time, we flew to Manchester, and loved it. It is close to Chester, the Derbyshire Dales,(a great area for many reasons,) Welshpool,in Wales, where Powys Castle Gardens are located. (we rented a house there from the National Trust, and it was one of our all time winners.- as well as all of North Wales, as well as Shropshire and all of Cheshire, not visited nearly enough, imo. Loads of gardens, maybe not much Tudor, can't remember my English periods as well as my English Gardens. Oh, yes, also Ludlow,fabulous restaurants, antiques shops, etc. Bristol would bring similar wonderful things nearby. So many wonderful choices, good luck.

Sorry to say that a rental car is probably a must if you fly to Manchester. It's one of those second cities where public transport is great, to other places north and south, and which has an excellent museum, and lots of cultural stuff, but the charming countryside nearby that I mentioned would need auto transport, I'm afraid. I love renting apartments, but didn't try for that in Manchester. no doubt possible, but no idea, except look in the usual sites, try &quot;holidayrentals.co.uk&quot;

I was did an exchange program in England a long time back.

I really loved Norwich and it would meet your definition of not being London, and having many historical buildings. (A church for every week of the year and a pub for every night of the year was the saying.) I loved the cathedral. The castle was decent, but not the best. Cambridge is also a train ride away.

Norwich is a small city, not a village, and we didn't really go to big manors nearby. Not sure if that was our ignorance or there weren't any.

If I were to do an English countryside trip, I would rent a car.

&lt;&quot;PQ...keeps telling folks it is easy to get from Kent... to other places&quot;&gt;

Janis - kindly show me where i said any such thing?

not the first bogus charge you have aimed at me and i'm rather getting tired of it

like when you have said repeatedly that i only copy and paste - i asked you to find even one example of that and you could not (hint - google my words and you will see if they are copied and pasted from some one else) - and you accused me of plagiarism

and many others

so can you document the statement above about what you said i say?

You are Fodor's British expert - seemingly knowing more than any other Brit on Fodor's about Britain - but why continue your pithy and untrue accusations about me that you never can document? Please stop. Corrections are fine and folks like flanner.uk have often corrected me but only with good cause that he has explained.
Sincerely PalQ.

Then there his &quot;Kent&quot; thread that may be the longest soliloquy in the history of Fodors&gt;

not nearly janis - another bogus charge - you should see my Palenque's Scenic Swiss Trains and CDF's European Rail for the Clueless - both are much much longer soliloquies than my Kent one, which is really in a nascent form

BTW several other folks have contributed to their thoughts to the Kent thread.

&lt;&quot;PQ...keeps telling folks it is easy to get from Kent... to other places&quot;&gt;

though i said no such thing i could make a case for Kent being easy to get to for:

folks landing at Gatwick Airport, practically on Kent's doorstep with direct trains i believe to Tonbridge and other Kentish towns.

and folks going or coming to London via the Chunnel train - get off at Ashford and you're less than an hour by rail from nearly every Kentish town.

In fact folks departing from Gatwick may wish to end up their British or Continental trips by spending a few days in Kent then taking trains from there right to Gatwick without having to go thru London

Or folks landing in London and heading to Paris or Brussels via Eurostar can train from gatwick to any Kent town with train service then easily hop over to Ashford to get a train to France or Belgium.

So easy to get to depends on what the circumstances are.