Oldmyst

you are going to have a great time! I'd have difficulty choosing Venice or Florence. They are so different. I would do Rome and Venice, then down the line do Florence and Tuscany. Whatever you decide, have a great time. The Albergo Del Senato is wonderful. Enjoy!

JLHood

I have to go with the crowd and recommend you choose Florence or Venice, but not both, for two reasons.

First, it will be late Sunday afternoon by the time you get to Florence. You'll be tired from your flight (especially if you're coming from somewhere other than NY since you'll have an extra hour or more tacked on to your flight) and the train ride. That basically means you're in Florence only on Monday since you leave Tuesday for Venice. You say you like museums, but if memory serves me, both the Uffizi and the Academia (where the David is) are both closed on Monday. So unless you could see both on Tuesday before hopping on the train to Venice, you wouldn't be able to see either.

Second, since you've never been to any of the three cities you want to visit, you'll be somewhat disoriented at first. This is especially true about Venice. It will take you at least one day to just get your bearings in Venice.

Both Florence and Venice are spectacular places, but I'd go to Florence. It's closer, so you'll be spending less time traveling on the train. And while there are good museums in Venice (especialy the Academia), Florence has both the Uffizi and Academia.

You can take the Leonardo Express from the Rome airport directly to Termini, the main rail station in Rome. It's cheaper and far more efficient than any cab, so take it. From there you can catch the Eurostar to Florence. It's about a two hour train ride. It's about twice as long to get to Venice from Rome. Don't buy a rail pass. It's cheaper to buy point-to-point tickets.

If you're still dead set on trying to see all three, make sure you go to Trenitalia's website to download the schedules for the Euro Star trains. They're the fastest, so you'll want to take an "ES" as opposed to an "IC" or Inter-City train if at all possible.

ira

Hi A,

>i just wanted to try to see and do as much as possible,...<

A common first-timer mistake.

I also urge you to do only 2 cities.

Since you are committed to flying into/out of Rome, I suggest Florence and Rome.

You will go back. Venice will be there for your next visit.

nevertooold

I quadruple (or is it nine or tentuple by now) the Florence - Romers.

We were fortunate enough to visit all 3 last May, and had 11 days to do it, and still did not feel entirely satisfied with our time in Rome (3 days) and Florence (2 days plus 1 day each in Siena and San Gimignano). Our 3 days in Venice was just enough to only begin to appreciate the beauty of this truly unique city.

I would recommend no less than 4 days in Rome - be sure to book a tour to each of the Vatican and the Forum/Colosseum - with the balance spent in Florence (and with some consideration being given to a day trip to Siena in the morning, and then going to San Gimignano later in the mid-to-late afternoon, for an early dinner after the hordes have departed, in time to take a bus back to Florence.

The time in Florence can be easily managed if you call the museum reservation line at 011 39 055294883 (as always, thank you Ira) where you can reserve entrances to each of the Accademia, the Ufizi, Medici Chapels, Pitti Palace, Bargello Gallery, and St. Mark's church, without any prepayment, and a reservation fee of 3E payable when, AND ONLY IF, you show up.

Have a wonderful time, whatever cities you choose.

lcallow

Hi

I just wanted to say - do not miss Venice.

My reasoning is that Venice is unique, there is nowhere that I have seen that is at all like it. Rome, Florence, London, New York, Paris . . . are more like each other than any of them is like Venice.

This has much (or all) to do with there being no cars, trucks, mopeds or even bicycles and to the fact that there is no modern part of the city. Indeed much of it looks almost identical to the way it looked centuries ago.

You may or may not like it but it is unique and I would suggest that you do not miss it. Rome and Florence will be more like many places that you have been while Venice will be different.

Myself, I love that difference and go to Venice at every opportunity. I have been back 3 times since dropping in for 3 days/2 nights to 'check it off the list' after a trip to Barcelona a couple of years ago. Each time I stay at least ten days and am going back for more in May.

Leonard

nessundorma

I think lcallow is right in linking Roma and Firenze to other international cities of commerce, with their fabulous museums and historic architecture, while holding out Venice as unqiue and uniquely preserved as a historic site, and its more about visiting that history than about seeing Italy.

That doesn't mean you can't miss it this trip, but the description may help you think about what to expect and how to alot your time.

Mimar

appletea, unfortunately Venice sinking is not a joke. Acqua alta (when the lower Venetian squares and pedestrian streets are flooded) is occurring more and more often. They do set up elevated wooden walkways, but getting around is more difficult.

But it's the most romantic of cities. For me, it would be a hard place to visit alone. But alone is better than not at all!

nessundorma

The recent engineering done in Venice has, as far as I know, reversed the problem of Venice "sinking." But l'acqua alta, or high water in the streets, is still an unpredicatable phenomenon. I always carry 4 plastic leaf bags and duct tape just in case, and even though the Venetians set up walkways above the water line.

ira

Hi nessundorma
>I always carry 4 plastic leaf bags and duct tape just in case,...<

I can understand one bag for each leg, but what do you do with the other two?

nessundorma

Do you imagine I would wear the same plastic bags two days in a row?

(I prefer not to have to wash them out in the sink.)

suzq_trvlr

Well, my husband and I did R-F-V last year with one less night and we didn't have to travel back to Rome. We flew into Rome and out of Venice. We're also in our late 20's (well, DH has hit the 30 mark) and we really just touched the surface of these cities. We managed to do Rome with three nights and three and a half days, but we were really rushed and didn't enjoy it as much as we would have otherwise. Our three nights and two and a half days in Venice didn't do it justice either. Since you have one less night and have to go all the way back to Rome, you really don't have time to get more than a glimpse of Florence. If you really, really want to see all three, you could take the train to Venice on Sunday, stay three nights and on your way back to Rome, get off in Florence for a few hours, check out the Ponte Vecchio and see David (you'll need reservations), hop back on the train and head to Rome. I would choose Venice over Florence and do a Florence/Tuscany trip on your next visit. You'll love Italy - just be sure that you don't rush yourselves so much you don't enjoy it. Leave plenty of time for wandering and eating gelato!

sherhatfield

When DH and I went to Italy last fall, we had originally planned on fitting Florence into the trip. The only way it would have worked out was to be there for Sunday and Monday nights. Because the museums are closed on Mondays, we opted to save Florence for another trip and add those extra nights to another city in our itinerary. We do not regret that one bit. Someday we'll go to Florence, but with your limited time, I'd pick just 2 cities and enjoy your time there.

If I was in your situation, I'd take the train directly from Rome to Venice, stay in Venice 3 or 4 nights, then train back to Rome for the remaining nights. I'd go back to Venice in a heartbeat and really wish we had spent more than 2 nights on our last trip. Everyone told me that Venice isn't worth more than 2 nights, but it turned out to be our favorite city. We think about it on a daily basis...