Rome or Venice?
 

My husband & I are taking a cruise and one cruise goes to Venice and Greece and the other goes to Rome, Naples, Barcelona, etc. If you could choose one or the other, which would be the better city to visit: Rome or Venice?

Good evening, Janet <BR>Between the two my choice would be only <BR>Venice. It a much smaller city with <BR>no vehicular traffic, but plenty of <BR>tourists as Rome also has. It is a <BR>place that when you depart from it, you <BR>will have plenty of pleasant memories <BR>, loving it greatly and wanting to return as soon as possible, or as some <BR>but only a few will hate it. <BR>Richard of La Grange Park, Il... <BR>

Venice, hands down. Who could hate Venice? It is definitely the easier city to manage off of a cruise and when you feel you'll feel that you have actually seen something. I'm assuming that you will have one day (and possibly another night) in each place and Rome would be completely overwhelming in so little time.

Ditto.

You need to do them all over time so just pick one. They are all magnificent and each has different things. Venice is great but Rome has things Venice does not, etc. I don't think one is better than another-they are all great. <BR>PS- To miss Florence you'd miss a lot of Italy too.

Though Venice is my favorite, they are both great destinations. I would think that your decision would be based on both entire trips, i.e., Venice AND Greece vs. Rome AND Naples AND Barcelona. And, weighing the choice that way, I'd still come up with Venice!

Assusming that you will only be there for a day, Venice will be much more managable in that short of a time; however, both cities really require an extended stay. Enjoy.

Given the circumstances you describe (a cruise), the time you will spend in port (not long I assume), and the other ports associated with each choice, I would choose Venice in this case.

Contrary to other posters, I much prefer Rome. While the city of Venice is the main sight,I found Rome much more intriguing with the ancient ruins of the Forum, Colisseum, and Panthenon, and the religious and artist significance of the Vatican. I've been to Venice once, and do not think I would go out of my way to visit again. While, Rome, on the other hand, I feel it would take me several visits to see all that I want.

My opinion is to go to Venice although you don't say what time of year you are going. I love Venice and just got back from there a few days ago. The Naples part of the Rome trip will not be appealing since it is a dirty city with too much traffic, pollution,noise etc.

I must also say I like Rome better than Venice. Although Venice is a beautiful place and very different, I liked the energy of Rome. Rome seemed more Italian and less touristy. I liked Venice but the hoards of tourists turned me off. I also think the restaurants in Rome are better. <BR> <BR>I also noticed that the Rome cruise also included Barcelona and Naples. With a set of cities like that how could you go wrong? Barcelona is suppose to be fabulous! In general Spain is a fun place to visit! <BR> <BR>You can see more info about Rome on my websight. The sight isn't completely finished but the Rome section is. <BR> <BR>http://home.earthlink.net/~richardab/ <BR> <BR>Follow the path; <BR> <BR>Enter&gt;Fly&gt;Europe&gt;Rome <BR> <BR>Let me know what you think.

When you go into Venice from a cruise, the ship will pass through the lagoon right in front of the main area of the city, including San Marco Square. That alone is a great experience. You also dock right in the city and can take a ferry boat from the dock to the main tourist attractions. I would go to Rome as part of a land tour.