So do you like St. Paul’s or Westminster Abey better, and why?
During my stay in London I visited both. I will say that they both were similarly priced to visit and both included audio tours. They were both quite beauiful and have long great histories.
One thing that was frustrating was that you could not take photos in either. I’m sure this is to maintain the integrity of the art and to sell coffee table books. I have several coffee table books from many of the different places I have visited, but I rarely, if ever, look through them. I didn’t buy a book on either place; subsequently, my memory has faded and I can’t always remember some of the details of what I saw in which.
St. Pauls at first, is more striking. Westminster Abbey is more of a sleeper – as I went through it, it grew on me more and more. It may not have been as large or as grand, but it had a lot more little nooks that enhanced it and made it special. Poet’s Corner, the Great Cloister, Lady Chapel.
One thing though that did set St. Paul’s apart was the views of the city. If you’re willing to climb a couple hundred steps you can visit the whispering gallery and get great views inside the cathedral, continue climbing and you can see the city. I was not in shape when I visited and the stairs were a challenge, to say the least. I didn’t climb up the 3rd set of stairs for the highest view of the city, but the view at the top of the second flight was great and worth the workout.