2 week in Europe Itinerary help
 

Hello,

This is my first post to this forum. My husband and I are planning to take trip to Europe next summer, and are starting to think about where we want to go. We think that we will be able to take off enough days to have 2 full weeks in Europe plus the 2-3 days it takes to travel to and from California. I traveled to London and Paris and had 3 nights in London and 4 nights in Paris in March 2013. I think that was a good amount of time in each city, but am not sure if it will be possible for our next trip. I would love to take my husband back to London and Paris, since I am oriented to those cities (and there were things at both of them that I want to go back to with him). We also want to go to Italy and do at least Rome and Florence. I've heard Venice is amazing, but it's kind of out way, and part of me would rather do a small thing outside of the 3 major cities like Lake Como, Cinque Terre, Capri, or wine tasting in Tuscany (we love wine!). I am also interesting in something in France like the Burgundy region or in Switzerland like Lauterbrunnen or Zermatt. My husband also really wants to do Barcelona, but I know that's also really out of the way so we will probably end up saving that for another trip since it wouldn't be possible without a pretty major flight. Basically, we are all over the place with where we want to go.

So for sure on the list are London, Paris, Rome, and Florence. I think I would like to do only 2 or 3 nights in Paris because I've been there so I know where I'm going (and would rather skip the Louvre which is a half day for most people anyway). Flying from Paris to Italy is an option, but taking the scenic route through France and the Alps would be awesome.

My real question is, what is a good itinerary for 14 full days in Europe (again, travel days would be separate)? Is there time to do a Venice, Lake Como, Cinque Terre, Capri , wine tasting region (Burgundy or Tuscany), Switzerland, OR Barcelona in a 2 week trip with London, Paris, Rome, and Florence? Again, I'm just hoping 1 of those would fit in. Has anyone been to one of these places and absolutely fallen in love?

No you can't do:

London
Paris
Rome
Florence
Venice
Lake Como
Cinque Terre
Capri
Tuscany or Burgundy
and Switzerland

... in 14 days :-) seriously, suze

If you read my post, I know I can't do that. I asked if there were 1 of those that could fit in with London, Paris, and Florence? Those are places I'm interested in.

^and Rome. Can't figure out how to edit my post

You can't edit posts here. Because the "forum" software sucks.

<i>So for sure on the list are London, Paris, Rome, and Florence.</i>

Keep it that way. 2 nights in Paris, 4 nights in London, 4 nights in Rome, and 3 nights in Florence. And fly from city to city (take the Eurostar from Paris to London).

Thank you for the suggestion. Why do you put 4 nights in Rome over Florence might I ask? Is there any day trips out of those cities you would recommend? When I was in Paris, we took a day trip to Compiegne (it was for a school project), and I loved getting out of the big city a bit. I guess that's more what I'm looking for.

<<Why do you put 4 nights in Rome over Florence might I ask?>>

Rome is a major city, Florence is compact and quite small.

Rome is bigger. That's my reasoning.

You could just say that you are going to spend 2 nights in Rome and 2 nights in Florence and spend 2 nights at some place in between that is along the way.

Well I think 4 major cities is plenty for 14 days, that only gives you 3.0 days in each place once you allow 0.5 for moving each time.

If you want to add another one from your wish list, then you're looking at only 2 days each place.

Venice or one stop in Switzerland would be the easier to get to than someplace like CT or Lake Como.

Pause and consider what is most important for you on this trip. There are dozens of places you would enjoy going, but you really only have time for perhaps 4 spots if you want to see/do/experience something of these amazing places. The more destinations you choose, the less you will see in each place. Day trips take time away from the city you are visiting. If you had a week in a city, then, sure do a day trip. But you will have just 3 days in each city.

Save the other places for your future trips.

For those that replied about Rome-thanks. I was just curious. My husband and I are Catholic and I was a Classics major so Rome's probably the most important on the trip.

Is Venice all it's cracked up to be? I've just heard that it's beautiful and Romantic, but I've yet to hear what anyone actually has done there besides look at the scenery.

>>Day trips take time away from the city you are visiting. If you had a week in a city, then, sure do a day trip. But you will have just 3 days in each city. <<

I'm considering day trips because I did 4 nights in Paris before and did a day trip to Compiegne (3 hours north), and still feel like I got to see everything I wanted in Paris. That's also why I would probably only do 2 or 3 nights in it this time around. That's also why I'm having a hard time decided if I want to cut some of these cities a little short and do another location. I don't want to miss out on anything, but 3 days was enough in each city on my previous trip to make me feel like I got a good taste

Is Venice all it's cracked up to be? I've just heard that it's beautiful and Romantic, but I've yet to hear what anyone actually has done there besides look at the scenery.

Yes, Venice is all it's cracked up to be!

Yes "looking at the scenery" including canals, boats, historic buildings, classic architecture, museums, churches, parks, art, etc. is what most people do there. What is it you are wanting to do besides that?

<3 days was enough in each city on my previous trip>

but you don't have 3 day this time, unless you limit it to only the 4 "must do" cities you mention. If you add even one more than you're looking at more like 2 days. If you add two more, then even less, and so on.

@Suze

I enjoy museums, food, and nightlife. It's just that when people I've talked to come home from Europe they talk about how beautiful most of the cities are mixed with their experiences of what they did in those cities. When they get to Venice all I hear is how beautiful it is. Don't get me wrong, that's great! I love to be in beautiful places. It's just that I haven't heard anyone say "In Venice we saw..." or something similar.

So you mentioned the museums and churches. That's mostly what I wanted to know about.

You obviously have only seen a teensy bit of London and a fraction of Paris . . . but think that is enough for you. So pick 4 -- which ever 4 you want from London/Paris/Venice/Rome/Florence -- and fly into the first one and home from the last stop. That will give you travel time plus 3 days free per city which seems to fit your travel style.

Just "google" top things to do in Venice. There's endless links and suggestions for churches and museums in the city.

Here's mine...

In Venice I saw gondolas gliding along the canals. I saw boats delivering produce to restaurants since there are no cars or trucks. I saw the Pescheria (fish market). I saw people hanging out in their neighborhood plazas every evening.

I saw pigeons and an orchestra playing in Piazza San Marco. I saw and walked over the Rialto Bridge. I saw Saint Marks Basilica. I rode a vaporetto on the Grand Canal at sunset. I drank espresso and cold white wine at stand-up marble counters around the city.

How about the Bridge of Sighs, Peggy Guggenheim Collection, Gallerie dell'Accademia? How about a boat out to the islands of Murano, Burano and Torcello? We haven't even gotten to all the churches...

Thank you Suze. That is what I was looking for. Maybe the people I have been talking to couldn't name any of those things since they were all in Italian so they resorted to "It's just romantic!" But I like to look those things up and figure out what they are

I don't mean to snub Venice. Any city in Europe is a huge time and money investment in just the two weeks we have. My husband is not the traveler. He'd rather drive 30 minutes to the closest lake and go fishing, so I don't know if I will be able to go again anytime soon. I'm just trying to make each city I go to worth it and I'm being overly-neurotic about it. Haha.

Not what you asked, but I'd spend the entire 2 weeks in Italy, and I'd see more than just big cities.

Jean-Where would you go in Italy for 2 weeks?

I want to take my husband to London for a few days (even just 3) because I loved it so much and think that city is great for our personalities, but I'm open to thinking about just flying Heathrow to Italy and doing most of the trip there.

5 days Venice, 2 days Florence, 7 days Rome ?

Do you like to see trains and airplanes, airports and train station? Because a lot of your 2 weeks will be spent not in cities but in transport between cities.

Have you looked at any guidebooks for Italy and your other destinations? They have lots of suggestions for what to see and do.

One important suggestion: buy open jaws plane tickets into one city, out of another. In your case, maybe into London, out of Rome. Such tickets, called multi-city on airline web sites, should cost about the same as round-trip. And save you the time and expense of backtracking to your entry point.

So if you fly into London, spend a few days, then fly to Italy. Perhaps into Florence or Pisa, spend a few days in southern Tuscany (rent a car), the train to Venice, and finally train to Rome. Or London to Venice, train to Florence, a few days in rural Tuscany, then train to Rome.

Where would I go for 2 weeks in Italy?

Since London and Paris make a great pairing for a future trip, I'd leave them off the itinerary for this trip entirely. Too much time wasted going to/from airports, security checks, etc.

You can't see every wonderful place in Italy in two weeks, so you (and only you) have to prioritize destinations and decide/agree on how much time you want to spend moving around, esp. as you say your husband isn't a traveler. For example, you mention Venice, Cinque Terre, Lake Como and Capri. FYI, Venice to the CT is well over 5 hours by train. Venice to Lake Como is 4+ hours. Venice to Capri would take basically all of a day. So, you have to weigh how important any/all of these places are to you.

Generally, I like to spend at least 4 nights in just about any place that has lots to see/do. You may think that's too slow, but we've spent an entire week in some places and still hated to leave, knowing there were things we missed. Four nights gives 3 full days of sightseeing.

Which part of the summer might determine where I would want (or be willing) to go, and two solid weeks of nothing but cities and the summer crowds in the most popular destinations would drive me nuts. For example, the Cinque Terre is now just bananas in the summer. (See photo link below.) You don't seem to be very interested in small towns, but there are museums and churches and archeological sites in smaller towns all over Italy.

http://onceinalifetimetravel.com/wp-...nque-Terre.jpg

Since there are hundreds of beautiful and/or interesting places to go in Europe, just about every place will be worth your time and money.

You have a year to plan so no need to write anything in stone yet. I am going on a trip this fall and still haven't decided on a country. However, I have thoroughly researched three or four places, including hotels. So you have plenty of time yet for research. Stay open for at least a few more weeks, even months. You will need to book hotels a few weeks ahead to get exactly what you want, but certainly not crucial yet.

IMHO, flying all around touching down here and there is not the best use of time and money sight-seeing wise. Same with long train trips to spend only a few hours in a place. For someone ticking off boxes, it does work, but more time traveling means less time seeing and experiencing.

Short (very short) day trips from a base city work well and you seem to like those.
Pick two or three cities you have your heart set on and research what is nearby. Nearly everyplace you can mention has fabulous places nearby you may not know about yet. Examples: Venice has Padua, Vicenza, Burano. Florence has a half dozen walled cities, villages, vineyards, etc. Rome has Ostia Antica, Tivoli, Orvieto, Beaches.

In Summer, Italy will be hot many places, especially most of the cities. Consider going in Spring or Fall. You will have more time to plan if you can wait until fall.

You say you husband is not a traveler. Maybe not, but maybe it is a matter of finding the style of travel he would enjoy. Someone who likes to fish may not like running around all over for a taste of this and that. Maybe they would enjoy slowing down and getting more a sense of a place. Just a thought.

What else does he enjoy or like to do? Food or maybe cooking? Theater? Biking? Boating? Photography? Travel can be more than seeing. I find when we do something, we seem to remember and soak up the culture a bit more. Look for things your husband (and you) could do as part of your trip.

There are cooking classes in many places in Italy. There are recs in trip advisor for fly fishing excursions in beautiful rivers in Tuscany. Look at Fly Fishing Italy. He could take a rowing lesson on a gondola in Venice. You could bike the walls of Lucca. You could take in great theater in London. You can rent long boats in England. There are many lakes where you can rent boats. Attend a concert in the Church for which it was composed.

See great cathedrals, museums, fountains, etc., but consider doing a few things too.

<i>For those that replied about Rome-thanks. I was just curious. My husband and I are Catholic and I was a Classics major so Rome's probably the most important on the trip</i>

Vatican City will be at least a day for you then.

Venice for me was the Peggy G and the Naval Museum, then walking the alleys in the early am and evening, taking the vaps around the place and avoiding shops. We all seek different things but Venice needs at least 2 nights.

I'd do London (and 2 nights is not enough), what with jet lag and getting used to a different country your DH will need 4 nights.

Then fly to Venice
Then train to Florence/Siena/Lucca and finally
Train to Rome.

For my first time in Italy (I'm thinking about your DH) I'd stay in the north, the south is another country.

Compiègne is less than an hour from Paris, so either you visited somewhere else or your memory is faulty. At any rate, if it was Compiègne and it made a nice impression, why are you going back to focus on nothing but big cities?

Europe is chock full of small and breathtakingly wonderful towns and villages. If that's what really appeals to you, build a trip around that, maybe including some lakes to fish in for your DH.

As for Venice, I never know how to answer these questions. When you have a place like that that has been around for thousands of years and been the epicenter of history, well, yes, of course it's got a few things going for it. If such things don't interest you, though, that's fine. Do something else - it's not as though there's a shortage of possibilities.

Regarding Venice, some people (me) love it, some loathe it. You won't know until you've been there, but rather than risk wasting days on this fairly short trip, I'd leave it for another time.

Thank you all for the further replies.

Here are some of mine:

We have to go in July. I'm a teacher, and I know that's the busiest time of year.

We actually went about 40 minutes past Compiegne to a teeny tiny village in the middle of nowhere. Compiegne was the closest "city."

I seems like Venice is far but most of your are mentioning it so it seems well worth it. Perhaps we will skip Florence and do Venice instead. I'd love to see Verona and I know that is near Venice too (I'm a high school English teacher who teaches Romeo and Juliet so it would be cool to bring that experience back to my students).

Thanks for the suggestions all. I'm keeping an open mind.

I liked Venice much more than I expected to! We spent a half day on the island of Lido, and also a "trip" to Murano where we met the most amazing artist. Peggy Guggenheim is a must, as is the Rialto Market, wandering and getting lost, taking the Traghetto to cross the canal.... It's like wandering on a movie set.
Venice, Florence, Rome is perfect for 2 weeks. We took day trips to Siena and Ostia Antica.

If I had a spouse who doesn't travel much I personally would not drag him all over w/ multiple airports/flights/trains.

I'd introduce him to international travel <i>gently</i>. Two weeks - two destinations (three absolute max). Settle in and do easy/interesting day trips and return 'home' each evening. No packing/unpacking over an over, dealing w/ airport security, long train rides.

London + Paris or Paris + Venice or London + Venice + Rome or whatever. But that would be IMO/IME a lot less stressful.

>>If I had a spouse who doesn't travel much I personally would not drag him all over w/ multiple airports/flights/trains.<<

He actually is the one wanting to go to 2343544543 cities and spend one day in each one, and I'm trying to tell him that we can't do all of those things.

I keep trying to talk him out of Paris so we can just stay in Italy but he's pretty fixed on doing London, Paris and Italy. So seeing what is feasible in Italy is the hard part. We also aren't totally sure how much time he can get off. He can get at least 2 weeks but it's possible we could get a couple more days which would make a huge difference. Obviously we are still in the brainstorming phase.

Well then -- let him have is way and teach him a lesson ;)

Not really, that would be a HUGE waste of both time and money.

Good Luck . . .

Venice for me was the Peggy G and the Naval Museum, then walking the alleys in the early am and evening, taking the vaps around the place and avoiding shops. We all seek different things but Venice needs at least 2 nights.>>

one of the joys of Venice is that there is something for everyone - the romance of the canals [and a gondola ride if you must] wonderful art and architecture, tiny alleys and squares to explore, the magic of the lagoon and the islands, and walking, walking, walking. oh yes, and the food.

And if that's not enough to whet your appetite, then you should know that the water level gets higher every year, and one year, it might just not be there, so IMO it's worth prioritising now.

Rome is also going to be a must, but perhaps not too long there; it will be hot, it will be crowded.

In between I would think about somewhere smaller, perhaps a hill town, which you can use as a base for touring; perhaps get the train from Venice to Verona, spend a night there then pick up a car and drive to one of the small Tuscan cities or towns?

Who knows, your DH might even find a lake to do some fishing - perhaps that would persuade him to concentrate on Italy on this trip.

<Perhaps we will skip Florence and do Venice instead.>

That's what I did. I could easily spend two weeks in Venice alone.

One trip we had a printed out walking tour guide (I don't remember but it was a woman who published it). It had the various site, monuments, parks, etc. all marked and suggested routes of various length. Since seem interested in knowing WHAT you are looking at, you might enjoy doing something like that a few times.

If you're not a big fan of Renaissance art and architecture, churches and museums, you may not enjoy Florence as much as Venice, which to my mind has something to appeal to everybody.

We spent 12 nights in Italy last year. It was a tough decision, but we chose to skip Venice, as it felt like the "outlier" city on our trip.

Here's a link to my trip report if you'd like more detail.
http://www.fodors.com/community/euro...y-may-2015.cfm

Lee Ann