Did the Great Fire of London cause more damage than the London Blitz?

Question: Did the Great Fire of London cause more damage than the London Blitz!?

Or did the Blitz cause more!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

In terms of how much structural damage it did to the city, yes!. However, I think the Blitz had a greater emotional toll!. It's hard to judge how people thought after the fire, as that information wasn't recorded anywhere!. I imagine pretty bad!. But the Blitz was drawn out!. It forced people to live in underground tunnels because someone was actively attacking them and trying to kill them!. A fire might be scary, but there's no malice behind it!. Besides, the rebuilding program after the fire made London a much nicer place, and healthier too!. It practically eradicated the rodent population, and London never suffered another outbreak of plague afterwards!. Www@QuestionHome@Com

London was very small in 1666, compared with 1940!. You can only do so much damage in a very small place!.

1666: 13,200 houses
Blitz: 1 million houses destroyed or damaged!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yes it did, most architecture you see in London was as a result of the wooden structures burning in the Great Fire!.
Although the 'Blitz' caused lots of damage it was nothing compared to the fire!.
Www@QuestionHome@Com