Where In The World (Or At Least In Europe) Do I Want To Go?
 

I have frequent flier miles and Hilton points to burn, and I want to go back to Europe. I haven't traveled widely in that continent, but I have been to Barcelona, Paris and Florence. I didn't like Paris quite as much as I liked the other two...not sure why, it just seemed a little sterile to me.

I enjoy architecture, history, fantastic food and wine, beautiful scenery, interesting sights, and great "walking" cities. I enjoy museums in general...but I'm not into old art so art museums aren't a big draw. We want to stay in one city for an entire week, so a city with interesting day trip options would be a plus.

Where do I want to go? Where have you been that springs to mind when you read my criteria?

Rome and London meet all your criteria!

I agree:
London or Rome

I kind of had London on my mind. How is the food, really, in London? I have heard mixed things. Snarfing my way through a foreign city is always my favorite part of vacation. ;)

Food in London has improved greatly from the days when defensive ordering was mandatory. It's not like Italy where it's very difficult to get a bad meal - but it if you do your homework up front there is lots of good dining at all levels.

Agree - if you like history, architecture and museums (of all types as well as art - british, V&S, London, Theater, Moving Image etc) London is a huge hit.

"How is the food, really, in London"

Crap. Really, really awful. Also, the very finest you can possibly eat anywhere.

What on earth else do you expect?

Of course you've heard mixed reports. It's a bloody huge city, with 30,000 restaurants, where unbelievably dreadful food can find a market, just the same as the finest raw materials lovingly prepared by the most imaginative and resourceful chefs in history.

Show me a city where food doesn't get mixed reports. The only way that could be possible would be if it were a monochrome provincial dump, visited only by people who shared thge same tedious taste as the boring restaurateurs.

In addition to Rome and London I would highly recommend Prague. It is a beautiful city with tons of possible daytrips. It is a walkable city, too. (And I'm with you on Paris - it doesn't do it for me!)

I think the food in London is vastly overrated, and I don't know why anyone should trust the judgment of Brits on great eating. Sorry!

If you like great walking cities, Rome (or London) is certainly not either. It can be highly enjoyable to walk around some pedestrianized parts of Rome, but otherwise it's extremely wearing. If you like walking in the rain (or snow), get the to London right away!

If you're not into old, but love great museums, great food, and want interesting day trips, I think it's hard to beat Madrid. Not much in the way of beautiful scenery, however, in the metropolis.

I'm a huge fan of Perugia, but it might not be a big enough city for you. Otherwise, it fits your criteria, if you can take uphill walking. Torino has great scenery within sight, right at its doorstep, and fantastic food and wine.

Bologna is only marginally a great walking city (it's got all those lovely porticoes) and is definitely scenery deficient, but it's got amazing food and fantastic day trip possibilities. Likewise Antwerp (no porticoes, however, and not great weather. Just to die for food and great day tripping).

If you didn't mind the chaotic aspects of Barcelona, consider Napoli.

I don't know anything about places like Lyon and Dijon, but they've always peaked my curiosity. I think Berlin is a truly amazing place, but I don't like German food -- and don't go for the scenery.

Typo: That would be "piqued". And you might want to consider Palermo.

Oh -- and Siena.

PS: If you're an American, the dollar vs the pound is so favorable at the moment, going to London makes sense if you've always wanted to see it.

zeppole...I spent time in Siena when I visited Florence. LOVED it!

Bologna has intrigued me for a long time, too. Mario Batali says it's his favorite "food city"...which is enough for me.

Amsterdam. An historic Hilton there, very walkable, nice architecture - make a day trip to Rotterdam too for modern architcture, lots of interesting day trips to make, lovely countryside if you are prepared to travel a little way, and even if you aren't it's pretty good close to the city. OK not wilderness, and mountains, but big skies, woodlands, water.
Museums if you feel the need too.

London is my all-time favorite place to visit.

In Italy, try Rome or Venice. The small towns of Lucca, San Gimignano, Verona, Ravenna, Asissi, and/or Orvieto are lovely.

The scenery in Switzerland and Austria is gorgeous.

I would have a hard time spending a full week in either Amsterdam or Madrid (and I really like both of those cities). I could spend a month in London with no problem, though. And I disagree about walking in London -- it's a fabulous city to walk in, much like New York.

Rome.

Have a great trip.

Well we all have different viewpoints but in my opinion Rome is a very walkable city. I have never even used public transportation or a taxi. My first thought when reading your interests sweet_polly was Rome. And you certainly could take a few day trips by train. Have fun no matter where you decide to go.

I'm very surprised to read that London isn't a walkable city! It's one of the best cities I know for that - you never know what you'll find round the next corner, and since it's a collection of neighborhoods (originally villages) there's lots of variety. True, it can be wet, but usually damp rather than a downpour (take an umbrella), and I might skip the winter months - except then you can spend your time in all those free museums.

I'd also suggest Venice and Lisbon. I just spent a wonderful week in Lisbon - see http://www.fodors.com/forums/threads...p;tid=35174288

What time of year would you travel? I would vote for Rome much of the year but not in the heat of summer

Well I sure agree, Rome would not be fun when it is very hot and humid.