I'm planning a Rome/Florence trip for my mother and I this fall. So far we've decided on 4 nights in Rome, but are undecided about Florence. We had thought 4 there as well, but have been told recently that it's so beautiful we should spend 5 instead. Does anyone have any opinions? We're flying in and out of Rome from the East Coast and will not be doing any driving (we've heard some negative comments about Venice, so decided to skip it for now. Plus the whole flying into Rome/out of Milan thing seemed to complicate matters, what with coordinating train and air schedules...plus making the air more expensive.) If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to read them! Thank you!!!

Why not Venice? It is wonderful. If I had 4 days in FLorence I wouold be quite happy--but definitely do go see Venice

My opinion. 4 nights(3 days) is not enough for Rome. I would consider 4-5 full days a good minimum. Depending on your interests Florence can be done well in 2-3 days. I don't know what negative things you heard about Venice. I found it a beautiful place. It to can be done well in about 2 days. If you stay in Florence you might also consider a day trip to Sienna. Eurostar to Florence from Rome is less that 2 hours each way. Florence to Venice less than 3 hours. Return from Venice to Rome somewhere around 5 hours. Don't know how long you will have total, but whatever you decide you'll wish you had more time everywhere. There are so many possibilities and you can't really go wrong.<BR><BR>Have a great trip'<BR><BR>Gerry

I think Gerry's advice is right on!

If you love big, noisy cities with crazy traffic, you'll love Rome and wish you had more time to spend there. If you hate them, you'll probably prefer Florence, which is much smaller and quieter. I love Florence for its art treasures, but I prefer Rome for its art and its fountains, its buildings, its neighborhoods, its people, its food, its shopping, etc.

We stayed a week in Venice and a week in Florence - beatiful - loved both places as we like to wander around and take things at an easy pace. Now planning another trip for my 60th birthday and trying to decide between them. Very difficult.

Just returned on Monday from a trip to Italy that included 3 days each in Rome, Florence, and Venice. I would recommend you go to all three - it was really interesting to compare the cities from a historical point of view. <BR>I'd say spend at least 2-3 days (probably 4 is enough) in Florence depending on what you like to do. We were there for a total of 2.5 days and managed to see the entire city (including the insides and dome of the major churches, the Uffizi and Accademia galleries, saw Pitti Palace inside and out) and still had plenty of time to wander the streets, shop in the market, and enjoy the sunset from Piazzale Michalengo AND we fit in an afternoon trip to Pisa. (Yes, I planned a very aggresive schedule so we could see everything, most people would probably take a few more days to do all we did). <BR>Go to Venice even if for one day just to see it - it's like nowhere else. I gather you heard that it smells bad and is full of tourist and pigeons? It is full of tourist and pigeons (Florence and Rome had just as many tourists). As for the pigeons, bring an umbrella so they don't bother you when they use you as target practice. I didn't find the canals to smell all that bad, however, I imagine that they would come the end of summer. <BR>We flew from the East coast into Milan with a connecting flight to Venice (i.e. no worrying about the train schedules/seat reservations). I believe there are several flights a day between Venice and Milan (the flight itself is only about half an hour), so no worries there. And our return flight was from Rome and we had no problems with the flights and it was no more expensive than flying to and from Rome.<BR>OR if you decide you absolutely don't want to go to Venice, like Gerry said why not take a day trip to the Tuscan countryside from Florence? If you don't want to drive SITA has bus tours that will take you (this is the company that we took our Pisa tour with - very comfortable buses, only bad thing is that they make you pay to use the on board facilities - it's a European thing, I'm sure). I think the surrounding countryside is half of what makes Florence so beautiful. <BR>Hope you have a wonderful trip!

On my last trip to Italy we also went to Sienna. I fell in love with this place and now plan to return and stay longer. It has a beauty that is unsurpassed.<BR><BR>I also agree with the previous posters that you should go to Venice-it too, is beautiful.

Hi Kila,<BR><BR>Of all the places I've visited in Europe, Florence is one my absolute favorites - there's just something about the place! Spend as much time there as you can. There's plenty to see, and you can easily take an excursion from there into Tuscan countryside. For the convenience, we took a bus tour day trip to San Gimignano and Siena which was really nice.

Everyone above is right. Go to Venice your friend is wrong. It is a very unique city, unlike anywhere else in the world. Venetians are very interesting, very cosmo and fast paced in a slow setting, great combo. The hotels and restaurants are a bit pricey, but so is London which doesn't even compare. The tourists leave Venice at night and it is great. The food is excellent also, Marcella Hazan has a house there and she shops at the Rialto market.<BR><BR>We stayed at the Hotel Metropole on Riva degli Schiavone (sp.?) right on the water which was very nice and is a couple of doors from the Hotel Londra and the Danieli. The venetian glass chandeliers are SO beautiful they are all over Venice and we had one in our room. I could kick myself for not going to Murano where they make the glass. Also, it's only a 3 hour train ride to Florence. <BR><BR>Florence is great for shopping and the Uffizi is my favorite museum in Europe but I get bored with Florence, I'm more of a city/beach girl so Rome and the Amalfi coast are more my style although I'm spending a week in Tuscany/Umbria soon since I love food and wine.

Depends on several basic things; one, whether you're both good walkers; and what your interests are in terms of museums, churchs and the like. I found Rome needs as much time as you can give it...so much to see. Personally, if you arent into spending long hours in museums i think two nights in Florence is fine. We were there in late May and wlaking around the city (where tourists walk) gave me the feeling of walking around Disneyland...so many people everywhere you turned...al over. It may be different in the fall. Having said that, Florence is beautiful but it is rather compact and you can see a lot. Venice is WONDERFUL; prsonally I found it better than Florence. If plane reservations are a hassle, you can take an early morning Eurostar from Venice and be back at the Rome Airport in about 6 hours or so. But it does waste time on the train.<BR>Whatever you choose, have fun

Kila: We did a similar trip last year, skipping Venice in favor of Rome and Florence. We also felt that doing the 3 cities on one trip was a bit much coordinating trains etc. We spent 4 nights in Rome than 3 nights in Florence and than back to Rome for 4 more nights. The break in Rome allowed us to stay in two different parts of the city (Via Veneto and Centro Storico)and get very different experiences. I would highly recommend you try something similar. <BR><BR>The luggage handling on the trains can be a problem and minimizing your train travel is smart. Incidently, we went back to Italy this year and got a Venice visit in all on it's own with a direct flight from NY to Venice. As the previous poster said, Venice is wonderful and would highly recommend it for you next trip. It was great being able to just focus on Venice and not rushing it in with the other 2 cities.<BR>