Norris22

Hi!
My husband and i are planning our first trip to Europe April 29 - May 14. We will be in Amsterdam for 3 nights, Paris for 4 nights and then we have 7 nights in Italy. I'm having trouble finalizing our italy itinerary and am looking for some guidance from some seasoned travelers. First, let me tell you about our travel style. Neither one of us are into art, so we don't have a huge interest in museums. Our interests revolve mostly around experiencing the culture, strolling down cobblestone streets, eating good food (pizza, pasta, gelato, drinking wine, hanging out in piazzas, beautiful scenery, admiring architecture and history (not art history). We are 29 and 31, healthy, active outdoorsy people.

All that being said, our original plan was to spend two nights in Cinque Terre (Vernazza), 2 nights in Florence and 3 nights in Rome. However, I'm starting to have second thoughts on Florence. I've been reading my guide books and It seems like the main attractions are museums. I've also read some forum posts that talk about Florence being dirty and too touristy (I expect tourist though...I mean...I am one). I know that Florence is full of renaissance architecture for my husband and I to enjoy. I guess my question is, based on my husband's and my interests, would you keep Florence on the itinerary? Or would you change it to another hill town (i.e. Siena, Volterra, San G.?). Are there any other changes you would make to our itinerary?

Also, I know that we are squeezing a lot of things in to one trip, but I am considering this trip a European sample platter. This trip will help us decide where we want to spend more time on our next trip to Europe.

lauren_s_kahn

If you don't like museums, you might want to rethink both Rome & Florence. You might like the Amalfi coast or Sicily if you just want scenery. The "guts" of Rome & Florence are the museums--some of the greatest in the world.

In fact, Amsterdam & Paris are known for museums as well. If you want an outdoor trip combined with food, you might be happier on a walking holiday in rural area in one of the countries. Given the short time you have, you don't want to spend too much time hanging about in airports (or on trains) getting from place to place. You don't have to do the big cities because people have told you that you should.

Aramis

>>>Or would you change it to another hill town (i.e. Siena, Volterra, San G.?).

Given your clearly stated interests, Sena is probably your best option here, so yes.

wrenwood

Don't disregard the "art" in Italy. It is not just in museums, it is in churches and through the hill towns, the architecture, it's really everywhere. The art tells the ancient history when people could not read.

I never thought I would be happy in a museum looking at "art" until Italy. Try a good tour guide who will explain how the art tells the stories of hundreds of years ago.

But don't forget to find the best gelato, pizza, pasta and wine experiences wherever you go!

Oh, and Limoncello

adrienne

Just because you don't like art doesn't mean you should not go into any museum. There are tons of museums that are not devoted to art but to other interests.

Skip Florence if you do not like art since it's very rich in art.

If you think Florence is touristy you should see Siena. It's smaller and wall to wall tourists. The lovely campo, which used to have wonderful shops and restaurants no longer has them. I had the worst pizza of my life in Siena. That's not to say that there are not areas of Siena where you will find few tourists but then you won't find the charming squares that you're looking for.

San Gimignano is also packed with tourists, particularly on the weekends.

What you will do in these towns if you don't want to go into museums or churches?

Have you considered a walking trip, based on walking from small town to small town, eating good food, staying in interesting lodgings? Backroads is one of the well known companies who provide this service. There are guides with you all day during your walk. This seems like the best thing for you to do.

Venice is a wonderful place for beautiful architecture, probably better suited to your tastes than either Florence or Rome or any of the other very touristy places you've mentioned.

You can stay outside the cities in an agritourismo and drive (or walk) to small towns with beautiful squares such as the Val d'Orcia area of Tuscany or some place in Umbria.

BTW - you didn't say who is telling you that Florence is dirty but I've never seen any streets with trash. Sometimes people confuse old with dirty.

lauren_s_kahn

Florence is no cleaner/dirtier than the rest of Itly.

sandralist

Have you bought your return tickets? Are flying out of Rome?

I suggest that you put aside the idea that this trip is going to give you a sample of Europe. You will not be seeing much on this trip. There are entire countries you are missing. And the rest of them are nothing like Amsterdam, Paris and wherever you finally go in Italy.

For your time frame and given your interests, I suggest you go to the Amalfi coast and Rome. Fly to Naples from Paris. Find a way to include Paestum. That way you'll at least know if you'd like to go to Greece on your next trip to Europe. Be sure to eat pizza in Naples, Salerno and Rome so you can come home knowing which you like best.

sandralist

PS: Pizza and pasta are the foods of southern Italy not northern Italy. The only pizza in le Cinque Terre is for tourists and the natives of Florence eat more soup than they eat pasta. Sort of like an Italian going to New York to eat barbecue. I think you'll like southern Italy better. If lots of tourists bother you, pick a town on the Amalfi coast where you can go hiking without the tourists. Consider Scala, Ravello, Minori or Atrani. (Consider landing in Naples, taking a train to Salerno, having pizza, spending the night, seeing Paestum the next day and then parking yourself in the Amalfi hills for a few days and nights of hiking before moving on to Rome for whatever time you have left.)

Bamaman

Whether you go to the big Florence art museums, it's an important town. Modern society as we know it was formed in this region.

And as far as side trips, Siena is best visited by bus, as parking and congestion is a problem. We loved Volterra, and hit San Gimignano late afternoon after the buses were gone.

Another favorite hill town is Orvieto, 70 minutes via train north of Rome. And the fabulous Civita is close by. Many drop off rental cars in Orvieto and get on the train to Rome.

miasmadude

Given your likes and dislikes, I'd probably do Rome instead of Florence. I think Florence is fabulous, but I went prepared for lots of art-seeing, my passion. The city itself can be a bit forbidding, stony. Siena is wonderful, but again medieval stone can be overpowering. Once more, the art was it for me.

But Rome is… Rome. The baroque sort of lightens up the heaviness. Even if you don't like museums, visit the Capitoline museum. Beautiful galleries with views over Michelangelo's piazza or the Forum. Rome is the perfect city for wandering through, stopping in a caffe or an open church. Read good guidebooks. Plan. Make up a search for all the Caravaggio paintings you can find. Or Borromini's works. No city in Italy really works if you don't do some prep, but Rome is so beautiful that you can sort of wing it there.

jamikins

I agree with dropping Florence. We are not art people either, but we do love Rome! There is so much to see there! With 7 days I would pick two locations so you have enough time to soak up the Italian dolce vita! Rome and cinque Terre, or fly to Venice then train to Rome. Or Amalfi coast and Rome.

Enjoy!