Hi Tarheels,

I agree, either Venice or Rome for the 5 days would be wonderful. Plenty to see and do in both cities, plenty of wandering and relaxing too. You can go at your own pace.

I think Venice would be more relaxing. No cars, more quiet. My first Italy trip included Venice in March and we loved it! Cool, but not cold enough for a hat. No crowds, but that was in 1996.

Buon viaggio!

How can you pass by the chance of visiting Rome?

Yes Venice is great but Rome is Rome!

Roma hands down.

Rome is wonderful and March is a great time to visit because it will feel more relaxed because it's off season and therefore less tourists. The weather is nice and you can still eat outside under the heat lamps for dinner.

I just love Rome. It's a city but it's not filled with skyscrapers like NYC so it feels completely different. And the historic center is very walkable, so it doesn't feel quite so big. I think you would have a super time.

Tracy

Venice would of course be my number 1 choice - leisurely strolls and a day trip to the islands - Murano/Burano. One bit of advice - unless you dine at one of the 5-star hotel restaurants - don't dine on the Grand Canal - expensive and the food is not the greatest. The side canals have lovely little places to dine.

Cinque Terre would be nice. There are trains running between the 5 villages. There is a lovely walk between two of the villages.

Most magical of all is Lago D'Orta. It is in the Lake District and the airport is outside Milan. Restaurants in the square all have views of the nunnery on the island in the lake - an absolutely stunning sight in the evening. You would need a vehicle. Also, you wouldn't spend 5 days there, but there are other beautiful lakes in the surrounding area. We drove from Venice through most of the lake areas.

Once you have visited Italy, one could rave on and on, but I have to go.

Have a wonderful trip

Wow, so no votes for Tuscany? :)

Thanks so much for all of the suggestions. My husband has been to Rome once, but I have never been and of course want to visit at some point.
I really hadn't thought about Venice, so we'll consider it! Neither of us have been there.

Our trip is the very beginning of March- actually, the end of February (we'd fly on the 27th). My husband will still be in law school at the time, so we're locked into his spring break. Weather is a concern in that we don't want to be miserable- but similar to NYC temps would be just fine.

Without a shadow of a doubt, imho, it should be Roma, nowhere lik it in the world - it's truly captivating. My husband is originally from Napoli, but to me there is nothing to compare to the the city of Rome - go, baby, go - adn best of luck w/the bambini-
ciao, Leslie

If you are going at that time of year - I would stay south. jmo. :-)

Tarheels, I did a late Feb-early March trip once to Rome, Umbria (Gubbio and Assisi), Florence and Venice. We started in Rome and had the warmest, sunniest weather there by far.

Totally anecdotal, I know. But I <b>do</b> love Rome.

Venice would also be an excellent choice.

They're all good choices.

We live in NY and if you can squeeze Rome and Sicily in, I would do so.

Tarheels,

The reason I would not recommend Tuscany is because you said you wanted public transporation. It's really not the best option to try Tuscany by train/bus. Tuscany in all other seasons, yes, but I don't know about winter.

Winter is a great time for the major cities - very little in the way of crowds! Lots to see indoors if the weather is bad. Less expensive lodging!

Thanks so much! I'm already beginning to look into both Rome and Venice a little more. It seems like Venice could be a little colder than we'd like at that time of year, but we're not ruling it out!

Dayle, yes, we would like to avoid renting a car if we can- neither of us drive stick shift, so it gets very expensive. We spent a week of our honeymoon in Montepulciano sans car, and really enjoyed slowing down to explore every inch of the town. We also hiked to Pienza and took a bus home, so we're very comfortable with using the (limited) bus service to do a bit of exploring.

Hi tarheelsln,

sorry I haven't read every post here- so apologies if I repeat what someone else has said.

My top choices would be Rome and Vencie, and in yoru expectant state, I'd go for venice - if only because it's a b---ger with a buggy.

Rome can be VERY tiring - Venice is less so because of the boats. we just spent a week there and we didn't see everything by any means. but in 5 days you could really see a lot of Venice itself, explore burano and Torcello, wander around exploring the little calle, etc. etc.

other reasons for going to Venice are that [IMO] it is the least child-friendly of the main Italian cities, and it may not be with us for much longer, if the water continues to rise at the present rate. so by the time your child is old enough to enjoy it, it may be gone.

Have a great time wherever you go,

regards, ann

Rome can be tiring, I guess, but it will be off season so you won't be fighting the crowds. I personally didn't find it any more tiring that any other big city I've been to in Europe. There is a lot to see and do, but you certainly don't have to do it all. We like just walking along the streets, ducking into beautiful churches here and there and sipping coffee and wine at outdoor cafes.

Tracy

I've been to Rome twice in February. Once it was sunny, warm in the sun but needed thick coats at night. The second time it rained.

Hi, I too live in New York City and without a doubt would say Rome. I was there last fall for 8 days and have planned a return trip for this fall for another 9 days. A truly magical city.

Another vote for Venice. The most romantic spot to enjoy before becoming parents.

I want to thank you all again for your responses. After talking it over, we've decided to keep this trip within the US. With our limited time, plus the declining dollar, we feel it's just not the best time for our return to Italy. But we'll look forward to going back as soon as possible, and I'll return to this thread when we do!