4 nights at Rome
 

Hi,

Just wanted to check if 4 N is appropriate/too much/too less for Rome?

Me and 2 other friends are planning a visit in June.

Pls suggest interesting activities apart from the sightseeing :)

Really appreciate the help!

TIA

Astha - have you read a guide book about Rome? have you worked out a list of things you might like to see or do? sightseeing is of course one of the major activities involved in a visit to Rome, plus eating and drinking. And shopping, if that appeals.

what else are you expecting to be able to do?

once you've got hold of your guide book [or read the online guide here] you'll have a bit more of an idea about which of the hundreds of things that there are to do appeal to you but if you are like 90% of tourists [and we were no different on our first visit] you'll want to go to the Colosseum, St. Peter's and the Vatican museum, and the Trevi fountain and Spanish steps. doing that, and the other major sights, such as the Forum, [you can see that at the same time as the colosseum] and exploring Rome on foot to see Trevi, the Pantheon, the piazza Navona, etc. etc will all take about 3 days.

but you could stay 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years and never run out of things to see.

Four nights (3 days) I think is the absolute minimum for Rome to see even the most major sights

Day 1 : Ancient Rome highights
Day 2: Vatican City/St Peters, etc
Day 3: Borghese Museum, walking tour of city, fountains, piazzas, etc

If you want to do day trips - Ostia Antica, Orvieto or a bunch of others - you need to add days for that.

Not sure what else you have in mind - cooking classes, hiking in countryside, ????

When I've only got a short time in a city like this, I tend to spring for a guided tour (walking, bus, bike...whatever) the first day, then figure out what I want to go back and do the rest of my time there. I did a tour in Rome a year ago - won't plug the company here - but it was fab and really laid out the rest of the trip well. Sightseeing just really will be a lot of your trip - there's simply a lot to see!! Aside from standard landmarks and museums and theaters there is so much just off the beaten path and away from the city center. Like NY said, hiking, classes, you name it! You can't even kill all the sightseeing options in just 4 days, so try to narrow your focus a bit - decide on your MUST SEE list and then make a plan from there...see if it leaves you 1 day, 2 days...no days?

Last year we spent a week in Rome and took three guided tours of Catacombs, the Colosseum and forum plus Sistine Chapel. The rest of the time we visited Spanish Steps, Trevi, Pantheon, Piazza Navona, Travastere Campio di Fiori and lots of churches on our own. We know there is lots still to see and will return again.

We did this visit at a leisurely pace and could certainly have done it faster but then one would miss the opportunity to just wander around and discover so many unexpected sites.
Just my opinion but if you can add more time to Rome you will not regret it.
Here are some images of our visit.
Rome http://www.flickr.com/photos/stanbr5...7634677664021/

Instead of NYtraveler's number 3, I would put "a major museum" instead of "the Borghese Gallery". Some people seem to think it's the only major museum in Rome. In fact, there are at least a dozen very important museums in Rome, and the Borghese Gallery isn't my own personal favorite. Of course, if you're mad for Bernini, you would probably want to visit the Borghese Gallery, but if you want to see Renaissance paintings, or modern art, or classical sculpture, there are other museums that might be more to your taste.

I think this question lacks a context.
This question asks 4 nights in Rome as something that can be judge on its own.
Is there even on option to change the nights? If this is fixed, this is an irrelevant question.

What happens if TIA stays in Rome 3 nights, what happens? What can TIA do in 1 night elsewhere? What is the trade-off in "interesting activities"?

What happens if TIA stays in Rome 5 nights and take away one night from elsewhere? How does one evaluate the trade-off without looking at both the minus and the plus side?