Hi!

I am trying to figure out how big Prague is relative to other European cites, so we can determine how many days we should plan (as far as size, how long we will spend seeing the must see sites, and "soaking it in" factor).

I thought a comparison city might help. We have been to London, Paris, Salzburg, Florence, Venice, Rome and smaller towns. Of the above, what would you compare it to (or in between?) Obviously this is a very subjective question.

Thanks!

I visited Prague in 2000 and loved the city. It is quite a large, bustling city with lots to see. It is more like Rome than the other cities you listed. We stayed 3 days and still had places and things to see. Compared to other cities was relatively inexpensive. The only difficulty we encountered was a language problem. Even with my travel companion who spoke fluent german. I hope to have a return visit there one day.

I stayed in Prague three Easters ago now. We only had three nights and three full days. I would have preferred an extra full day to to go "further afield" on a day trip to the countryside. I think for a first pass four days would suffice.

I agree with the previous post the language is certainly different!! My sister speaks three languages fluently and she struggled - nothing like she had ever spoken before!

We stayed in the Mala Strane (spelling?)area and thought it to be a terrific spot. Don't stay near Wenceslas square - a bit seedy for me.

Hop on a tram for about 20c and head to the end of the line and then just return back again! A very cheap way to see the outskirts of Prague. It is much smaller than Paris and London etc, the must sees are concentrated in one central area. Very, very pretty city, almost too pretty, but I prefer that to scruffy!

The population of Prague is 1.2 million. It is thus much smaller than Rome, let alone Paris or London.

And i was surprised to learn, on Wikipedia, that its population is so high. It sure feels smaller. For example, the quite rural-seeming airport is easily reached from the centre in about 25 minutes, by taxi.

There is no right answer to the question How long is long enough.

You will get many opposing opinions, more than for most destinations. There are Prague lovers and Prague sceptics.

Others find the place magical.

I found it beautiful but overrun, with many louts apparently on so-called stag parties.

(Of course they had as much right as I to be there.)

I started thinking darkly of a bomb that eliminates the people but leaves the buildings intact.....(it would have to be genetically coded not to hurt the Czechs, who have already suffered so much)

I found Prague to be more like the size Florence than Rome- except cars and streets are larger- and it does not have the fashion or frenzy of Florence. I loved Prague- we also stayed in Mala Strana and it is a really quaint area. We were in Prague for 6 days. It was perfect with a day trip to Terezin. We were going to do another day trip to Hutna Kora but my family was so relaxed in Prague they just wanted to hang out. We're from NYC and Prague had history, beauty, charm, but it did not have the vibrancy of a big city like Rome, NYC, or Paris or London. We went to Paris afterwards and that was like a real culture shock after Prague---then we went to Vienna and that was a bit more like Prague but more cosmopolitan-it had an elegance about it.

It definitely did not feel like Rome to me at all. I'd say it's more in line with Florence than any on the list you provided in your question, but it felt "quaint" like a small town to me, despite it's larger-than-a-town size. It is a very manageable, comfortable city. I spent three full days there and covered what I wanted to see in Prague itself. I wish I'd had one more day for a day trip out to Kutna Hora or Terezin, but otherwise I was happy with the amount of time there.

Hi all,

Thanks, this is really helpful. I would love to see a fodors category or just specific threads on how long to plan on European cities (that you can easily search on). Of course, it all depends on your travel style. In general, I think you can categorize yourself as fast paced, medium, and slow travelers and it would be useful to know what category you fall in and how many days you would plan for a given city.

Just a thought for a forum improvement...

Thanks!

I thought PRague was about a million, that doesn't surprise me. Aside from Salzburg, which is much smaller as well as the small towns you mention, I don't think it matters that much the actual size of the city for a tourist. Tourists usually just visit things in a city within a small concentrated area, regardless of the actual size of the city in total. I've seen similar posts on Fodors (some years now) where people claimed Paris was the same size or smaller than Manhattan in physical size. Of course that's not true, but a lot of people felt that way because they don't go anywhere in Paris except the immediate center area about 1 square mile.

A first-time tourist isn't going to be visiting all of Prague. Now I don't know about Venice and Rom, but I don't think it matters whether London and Prague are different in size, I think the important thing is why you are visiting a city and what you want to see and do. I think you can spend as much time in Prague as someone might in London, but if you want to go to a lot of English theater in London and every museum, you can spend a lot more time on that kind of thing than you would in Prague. I think a lot of people just like visiting a couple museums, anyway, on a trip, so if a city has 6 good ones or 20, it doesn't matter so much.

As Tedgale pointed out, there is no right answer to the question, How long is long enough.

On my first visit to Prague, I spent six days there, with a day trip to Karlstejn.

On my second trip, I spent four days there.

It's not the size of the city that counts; it's the degree of interest that you bring to what it has to offer.

Most of the points of interest in Prague are within walking distance of each other and can be seen without using public transportation.