Hi ya'll. I have earned a short and sweet "free" trip to Europe for two--the company is paying for hotel and airfare (free is in quotes because we have earned it by traveling to Europe with teenage school groups!). A friend and I have narrowed our options down to either Lisbon or Florence. We will be traveling mid-May, coming in on a red-eye. If we go to Florence, we will have to fly into either Rome or Milan, as Florence wasn't actually an option given, so we will have to spend a couple of hours on the train there and back. For Lisbon we would fly directly in to Lisbon. Our interests are mostly food and wine, a little art, some architecture, strolling around, and just soaking up the city really. We have both been to Italy, but just to Rome for two nights. Is there an obvious first choice? Is there something we should consider when making this decision?
Posted by
Washington DC
27236 posts
I'd go with Lisbon, especially since you said "a little art" rather than "art". (And Lisbon does have the Gulbenkian, anyway.)
My thought process is this:
The Lisbon flight should be shorter.
With Lisbon, you step off the flight at your destination rather than a train ride away.
No need to rush back to Milan on Day 4 to position yourselves for the flight home the next day. Just one hotel to check into.
In other words, Lisbon has quite a bit less wasted time.
Posted by
Brisbane, Australia
7175 posts
Definitely Lisbon.
Four days is a perfect amount of time to enjoy the city, and even a day out to Sintra if you fancy.
We pretty much all know what to expect with Italy, but Lisbon can offer surprises, and I'm not just talking about delicious custard tarts. Great seafood too.
Time spent connecting to Florence would make it a 'no-brainer' for me.
Posted by
Plano, TX
133 posts
Another vote for Lisbon: great for walking, but bus system easy to figure out; food and wine are different from Italian, especially seafood, try snails (different from French) and the sardines (nothing like those tiny canned fishes) See the RS Lisbon book for walking tours. The Alfama stroll and the Castle Sao Jorge were our favorites.
Posted by
OP
5 posts
Thanks for all of your thoughtful replies. Neither of us are huge seafood fans, but big cities offer lots of options!
Posted by
New York, NY, USA
11294 posts
I agree with everyone else that Lisbon, in your situation, is the better choice. I'll just add one caveat: parts of Lisbon are flat, but parts are VERY hilly. As is said of San Francisco, "if you get tired of walking around Lisbon, you can always lean against it."
As for the food, you can indeed get all kinds (particularly in the Bairro Alto). For me, Portuguese food was most memorable not for itself, but for the portion sizes. Many dishes have the options of a meia dose (half portion), and one guidebook warned that a "full dose" serves two. No - it serves three, and as a single diner, the meia dose was sometimes a gut-busting amount of food. And, almost everything comes with both rice and potatoes. The food is good - just be prepared.
I know this sounds negative, but I did have a good time in Lisbon, and I think 4 nights is a perfect amount of time there. Rick's book should be all you need for sights, transit, etc. One place worth visiting that I don't know if he mentions is Pavilhão Chines. It's a bar/cafe with fabulous decor (old toys line the display cases in the walls). I just ordered tea and sat at a table; there are multiple rooms, so it's not at all like you may picture a "bar" looking like. Quite a hike uphill in the Bairro Alto, but worth it.