Please sign in to post.

Is Warwick Castle Worth the trip?

I remember going to Warwick castle as a teenager (20+) years ago and absolutely loving it. I loved the way that I felt that we just stepped back in time. We are heading to England and Scotland in the summer of 2016 and there will be a mixture of adults (40-somethings), teens and college aged children. The kids really want to see an authentic, preserved castle with furnishings. I thought immediately of Warwick, but looking at the website and reading a few books, it appears to have turned into a money-making Disney-esque experience. Has anyone gone lately? Has it lost its authenticity? Is there another castle that fits the bill? We are going to London, Bath, Stratford, York, and Edinburgh and would be absolutely interested in taking a side trip to a great, furnished castle circa Henry VIII or earlier. We will be touring Hampton Court as well and have been to Windsor already. So, any other suggestions would be wonderful!
Thank you,
Cheryl

Posted by
661 posts

Search the forums, this exact question was asked not so long ago. The general feeling was, it was totally worth it and the website didnt really represent what was actally there.

Posted by
4 posts

Hi Cheryl
Warwick Castle is still very popular - I personally feel it has become far more commercialised and themed over the past several years but still worth the visit I would say.

I would also recommend Sudeley Castle in Winchcombe, (between Cheltenham & Broadway north Cotswolds) www.sudeleycastle.co.uk a much smaller alternative to Warwick but offering you the Tudor / Henry VIII period you mentioned in your question. Winchcombe is a lovely town to visit & if you enjoy walking you could also maybe visit Belas Knap (Neolithic long barrow - c.3800 BC on the same day!

Posted by
6788 posts

I went to Warwick Castle in early July of this year. Is it highly commercialized? Yes. Is it Disney-esque? Nah, I didn't really think so - while somewhat inauthentic with all the extra stuff, none of those are mandatory and are easily ignored. It still felt like a real castle. Did I enjoy it and feel it was worth the stop? Yes. I am about as jaded and cynical as anyone (more than most) and I still enjoyed it. It's not cheap, it's full of tourists, and they look to hook you with a million add-ons. But if you want a big castle that's intact, has parts that appear to be lived in (or at least are set up with exhibits that purport to show that), it works. I skipped all the add-ons, food options, and other extras. Just paid for parking and the basic entry fee. I was happy enough climbing all the walls and towers. It's definitely a place where you look around and think "I know I've seen this in some move before..." A couple hours were enough for me. It made a convenient stop for us, breaking up a long drive.

Posted by
3580 posts

Yes! The castle is still real. You can ignore the more commercial aspects if you want to. Weapons demos were interesting. I loved the furnished apartment with wax figures of real 19th century people, including that of a young Winston Churchill!

Posted by
14 posts

Thanks for all the replies. I feel better about adding a stop into our busy itinerary. It's hard to live up to a great memory sometimes. :-)

Posted by
6788 posts

By the way, if you're going to Edinburgh, you will of course be visiting their big castle on top of the city. That's even more overrun with tourists and your groups, but it's a real castle and feels like it. For York, the city itself, while not a castle per se, has great ramparts you can walk. I always do all the castles and walls everyplace I go, and York was the first one that I did not manage to walk every foot of - the York walls go on and on. Should be a hit with any castle fan.

Posted by
3768 posts

Yes. Warwick Castle is worth visiting. Yes, their website is terrible, just awful. It makes it look like a cheapened Disneyland. But it is not like that in reality. Talk about a website misrepresenting the place it shows.

Read the history of Warwick Castle. The more you know about the people who lived there, the more interesting the castle will be to you. The stone castle you see today was built in the 12th century. It is a real medieval castle, in good shape, although it has been heavily restored and renovated. So many of the medieval castles in England were torn down ages ago, or are in ruins. Go, forget the touristy things that have been added, and just look at the old medieval castle, and think about its history.

Also walk around the town of Warwick. Very interesting, with good places to have lunch or afternoon tea.

Posted by
6522 posts

A couple of other possibilities, if you're driving up to Scotland through Northumbria, are Alnwick and Bambergh. Both authentic castles, with walls and towers and all that.

Part of Alnwick is still occupied by the Percy family who dominated that part of the country back in Wars of the Roses time. Some of the Harry Potter sequences (the Quiddich match?) were filmed there. The gardens are also famous.

Bambergh is right on the North Sea coast a few miles south of the Scottish border, a spectacular setting. We just about got blown off the hilltop the day we were there. I don't think it's still occupied but parts are furnished.

I visited Warwick in 1963 and loved it, but I gather some changes have occurred....

Posted by
824 posts

If you want to see an "authentic, preserved castle with furnishings" I would recommend Windsor Castle because it is still a Royal Residence. The art and "artifact" collection in Windsor is second only to Buckingham Palace.

Another option while in London is the Tower of London. In addition to holding the Crown Jewels, there are also many exhibits displaying what life in a Royal Court was like during various periods.

Edinburgh Castle is a must see when in Edinburgh because of the history, period furnishings and the Scottish Crown Jewels. (Edinburgh Castle held American POWs during the War for Independence.)

Another very worthy option in Scotland is Stirling Castle. Just a short train ride Edinburgh, it makes a very nice day trip.

Posted by
214 posts

Arundel is very worth seeing but might be harder to get to.

Posted by
3768 posts

I also suggest Hever Castle and Leeds Castle. David is right; two good choices.

Windsor Castle, Tower of London, and Edinburgh Castle are also terrific.

Posted by
228 posts

Just a couple of year ago, we visited Warwick without children; just the two of us adults. WE LOVED WARWICK CASTLE and when we were in England just a few months ago, we missed not going to it. Great castle! Great town surrounding it. Great experience! If you do go, be sure to leave the castle area and go out into the city... beautiful. Definately keep it on your list of castles to see.
I too found their website to feel very 'touristy' and 'Disney' like. But it's not. It's just their marketing to get families to buy year passes with new and improved things to do.
In London we visited Kensington castle and also loved it. My favorite part was the King's wing! Blenheim palace around Oxford was very neat, but for us, like the Eiffel tower, a one time experience. We'll definately go to Warwick the next time we're in England.

Posted by
89 posts

We enjoyed an incredible family day at Warwick on a summers day when they hosted a medieval jousting tournament. Such a spectacular setting for this!

Posted by
1 posts

Definitely worth a couple of hours. Shop around on line and in Warwick as there are some deals to be had on admission tickets. We stayed at the Warwick Arms Hotel and they gave us a good discount voucher. Staying locally will also save you on parking if your driving.

Yes - it's a little commercialised but as other posters have said you can take it or leave it and just enjoy the Castle for what it is. Lots of re-creations to see - we particular liked the birds of prey show.