Experts: how much time for each city please?
 

Generally speaking how many days (my day ends at 7pm) would it take to exhaust each of the following cities for tourism sake?<BR><BR>Rome<BR>Paris<BR>Venice<BR>Berlin<BR> London<BR>Madrid<BR>Seville<BR><BR>I'm trying to put together an itinerary for 2002. These are the cities I would like to visit sometime, maybe this year, maybe some other year. Thanks!

I would like to help you Matt, but...<BR>are you consider travelling by car/air/train<BR>how long will u stay in one of those cities and<BR>do I have to follow the itinerary or may I switch cities ?<BR>Shain/EU/DE/D&uuml;sseldorf

Impossible to answer but I'm sure you will get a long list of conflicting answers. If you lived in each of these cities for a year you wouldn't exhaust all they have to offer. And each person has different expectations from their visit. <BR><BR>Roughly speaking I would say that a week in a city gives you a chance to really get a flavor of that city. However, I've spent several weeks in Paris, cummulatively, and haven't begun to exhaust it. Same thing with London and Rome. Venice for me is one of those places I like to spend 3 or 4 days and go back to from time to time.

I just want to know strictly as a tourist that wants to see the sights and take a holiday to each of these cities. It doesn't matter how I get there, I just want to determine how many days I should stay at each city. Thanks.

Hi Matt,<BR>to see only the absolut tops, not including half day of travelling whether by car/rail/air, I recommend a<BR>minimum of full<BR>3 days rome<BR>4 days paris<BR>2 days venice<BR>3 days berlin<BR>4 days london<BR>3 days madrid(incl 1day toledo)<BR>2 days seville<BR>plus 8 days of travelling from one to the other city<BR>That makes it four weeks absolute minimum !!! But than you got hundreds of pictures, a touched the cities soul only on the surface.<BR>I would think about it twice.<BR>More infoes needed/email me<BR>Shain/eu/de/D&uuml;sseldorf

Matt<BR>As others have said, it depends on what interests you and how avid a sightseer you are. Churches alone in some of those cities could each take a month! I think rather than the word "exhaust" I would substitute "see the 5-10 most famous sights."<BR>I can't speak to Spain or Berlin at all, but regarding the others I don't have any strong disagreement with Shain's suggestions as long as you acknowledge that you'll just be skimming the surface in each place.<BR>My first trip to Rome was nearly a week, and I was frustrated by how much I didn't have time to see! Ditto London.<BR>Both are quite spread out,and have many many treasures and pleasures. Venice and Paris are my two favorites, but Venice is quite small and I suppose two days would do for an introduction, but three would be better. 4 days might do for Paris, again, as an introduction.<BR>And if you do combine several places into one trip, allow that for each day you travel from one place to another, don't count on any sightseeing that day unless you are driving a scenic route.<BR>Getting from one place to another,checking out and checking in, even when all goes smoothly, pretty much kills the day.<BR>And we haven't even mentioned daytrips.<BR>So many sights, never enough time!

Matt, After 21 trips to Europe, my best advice to you is to not perceive Europe as big cities. Perceive it as regions, not even countries, and attack it that way. If you spend more than 50% of your time in the major cities you will have missed the real Europe.

If your day ends at 7 PM, I think you need a week or more for Paris, at least 8 days for London, and about the same amount of time for Rome.<BR>I am assuming that in a city like Paris you are going to do more than see Musee d'Orsay by driving past it in a rental car. Or visit Hotel Invalides from the outside.<BR>Berlin is a fascinating city, particularly in the way it has grown since the fall of the wall.<BR>These cities are not exactly 2 hours from each other.<BR>

You will need 5 days in Rome just to see the major highlights. Fewer days in Venice.

I believe you can see many of the MAJOR sites in ANY city in 3 days. As far as wandering around and exploring and seeing the secondary sites, fine if you have extra days. The length of your visit would also depend on the season/weather. In the winter you are typically rushing from place to place, so you won't need as much time as in nice outdoor weather where you want to relax at outdoor cafes, markets, etc.

I don't agree that you can see Paris in 3 days, particularly if you include Versailles. You might do it in 4 if you leave out the Louvre totally, and don't spend more than 3 hours at major places like Musee d'Orsay, the Rodin Museum, and just breeze through some of the other places.<BR>If those places do not interest you to the extent that you want to take them in, why go in the first place???<BR>A cursory peek at the premier attractions is really not worth the effort. Why take just a glimpse at the Musee d'Orsay? Is all you want to do is run in and say, "Well that's the Musee d'Orsay. What's next?" And then dash out??<BR>Why dash in to begin with? That strategy escapes me entirely. I guess the bottom line is this: Why go if you don't want to see what is there?<BR><BR><BR>

Thanks for your ideas and suggestions. I looked at Rick Steves web site and he gave a good itinerary plan that arranged each country and how many days to spend in each city/region. I found it interesting that in Germany, Berlin was the 4th priority. It looks like I'll spend 1-2 weeks in Rome, 1 week in Paris, 3 days in Venice, possibly 3 days in London and if I only spend 1 week in Rome then I'll go to Madrid for 1 week instead.