Rome, is it a must see?
 

Planning a trip from California to Italy in September, probably 10 days. I will try for more if I can afford it.
The question is, is Rome a must see when going to Italy? Or can you get away with just going to Venice & Florence and other little areas?
Any advice would be great.

..depends on your definition of "must see". Define what you want from this trip. There is nothing anyone must see if it does not fall within the goals of your trip.

Nothing is a "must see." You might be fine spending two weeks in Paciano. Who knows?

I sure wouldn't call Venice and Florence "other little areas" though.

I can't imagine going to Italy the first time and not seeing something of Rome. I went to Florence and Venice only on my 2nd trip. I say this as Rome is my favorite city in the world so perhaps I am prejudiced. Then as others have stated it depends on what your interest are.

I didn't mean to call Venice & Florence "other little areas". I was referring to places around Florence, or little towns between Florence and Rome. That's what I meant.
A "must see" is referring to, if going to Italy for the first time...should someone definitely go to Rome?
I just feel like I am packing too many places into 1 trip. I definitely want to go to Venice & Florence(Siena, Pisa).
Thanks again for all your posts.

I didn't visit Rome on my first trip to Italy. In fact my first stop in Italy was Torino--a friend lived there. then we visited Padua, Venice, and Florence. We each have our own priorities based on or own interests. You can create a lovely first trip to Italy without including Rome.

The year after my first trip, I went to Italy again. That time I started in Rome.

I went to Rome my first trip to Europe in 1983. I have been to Europe 54 or more times and have not been back. I had a two bad experiences there and I just haven't decided to go again. But I am definitely going to give it a second chance soon. I have read all the wonderful things written here and I know I would love it. I am many years older and a little wiser, so I think I am ready to try again.

if you have only 10 days , your plan is fine .
There is so much to see in Rome ,you might as well leave it for another trip.

Have you made your flight reservations Ali_Isky? And if so where will you be arriving and departing from?

Many people go to Italy and do not visit Rome. With ten days I think that you have planned your trip quite well. Rushing from place to place takes away from the enjoyment of Italy in my opinion. I would save Rome for your next trip, and if you are like most you will take another trip to Italy.

THis is totally personal.
Is Rome a fascinating city to visit. You bet. But of course you can visit other cities far from Rome and leave Rome for next trip. An open jaw ticket departing from ROme for instance might give you few day there. It is not such a huge, huge city. There is certain feeling in Rome at least for me that is inviting and walkable to a great extend.

Wow Scatcat - 54 + times going to Europe! That's great!
Thanks to all for all your advice.
I think I'm getting the feel of maybe going to Florence & Venice and then checking out day trips from those places. So I'm not rushing on a 10 day trip and still enjoying some down time relaxing.
I'll maybe save Rome for another trip.
Thanks again to all.

LoveItaly,
I'm departing from California, probably from San Francisco. I haven't booked my flight yet, still working out all the details.
I thought about arriving in Venice and working my way down. Or vice versa, arriving in Rome and then going up to Venice.
Like I said, I'm still looking at different possibilities. :)

From a historical perspective Rome is a great starting point for a first trip to Italy.

Hi Ali, if you do decide to visit Venice and Rome I would suggest you fly into Venice and home from Rome. So often the flights departings from Venice are very early in the morning. I too fly out of SFO. KLM has flights from SFO with a change of planes in Amsterdam (a very user friendly airport) and the KLM City Chopper onto to Venice.

Open jaw ticket is definitely a good idea if you decide to include Rome or even if you stay north. I think two days in Rome (assuming you fly out the a.m. of the second day) could give you an overview and a feel for the place. It's a good hub for numerous flights and I actually found more choices and good prices flying out of Rome.

That said, I like your idea of 10 days in the north. There is plenty to see, it's a slower pace that way. I also fly from San Francisco and often feel a wreck for a day or so and appreciate the slower pace.

Venice, Florence, hill towns, Siena, and the like give you a lot to see; Cinque Terre are within reach too. Could be a very nice trip. You could fly into Venice and out of Florence (you'll transfer probably), or out Pisa -- if you do fly out of Pisa, Lucca is nearby and worth a visit.

We had two weeks in europe last summer and I felt we rushed around too much. We were traveling with family and so we went at their pace. We saw a sprinkling of cities from Germany throughout Austria and three days in Paris. I enjoyed the trip, but would have liked to move around less and have really seen a few places thoroughly, but that is my personality.
So, if hitting Rome will be running around too much for 10 days, then I would suggest you just pick a few places to go and enjoy them.

If you interested in the history and culture of western civilization, Rome is an excellent choice.

The question becomes why do people travel and what do they want from their travels?

One time on a layover back to the States we took a cab from the airport (FCO) to the city just to have lunch and walk around Rome.

I am always astounded as you walk around Rome and turn a corner just see to another antiquity.

And even though I am great admirer of Brunelleschi, I do not like Florence due (not due) to the amount of tourists and all that caters to them.

Over the years we have spent over 1 and half years in Europe, not in school or on business, and Italy remains one of our favorite countries.

We travel with the thought,we would rather see a few places well than many poorly.

My thought is that you should go to exactly the places you are attracted to and think you want to see.

The world is a must see; we just can't all get to every bit of it.

I had been to Italy three times before I visited Rome. To some people, you can't get away with it, so if you choose to enjoy other places, be prepared for gasps and lectures of disapproval from people who are intolerant of other people's sensibilities.

Even though you're a "first timer" you already sound more sophisticated than a lot of frequent travlers to Italy who never get off the tourist treadmill. If you have sense you might end up trying to pack in "too much" -- you're a travel artist, believe me!

The single biggest mistake everybody makes is trying to pack in too much on a first visit.

Venezia, Firenze, Pisa and Siena rank highest in the Italian "cities of art." They are crammed with astonishing, unique treasures. In 10 days, you'll scarcely scratch the surface.

Going to Cinque Terre would really waste time. It's hard to see how you'll be able to fit in a visit to any smaller town. Were it me, I would simply take a bus up to Fiesole (above Firenze) to get the feel of an agricultural Tuscan landscape, plus this is the starting point for Fra Angelico, whose monastery museum in Firenze is a fabulous experience to see. Althogh it's not a hilltown, the architectural layout of Lucca might interest you, and it's an easy train trip from Firenze, and a very nice place to go if you find the motor traffic of Firenze and Pisa getting on your nerves. It has almost no cars.

For day trips from Venice, consider Torcello and Padova and Verona (you can see a Roman arena in Verona).

I forget to include the name of Fra Angelico's (and Savanarola's) monastery (now a museum): Museo San Marco

http://www.polomuseale.firenze.it/en...usei/sanmarco/