Seeking Itinerary Advice - Paris, Rome, Amsterdam, London - 21 nights

I would not waste a day on a trip to Brussels, but maybe a day trip in The Netherlands.

The idea of limiting yourselves to one or two major attractions per day is a sound one. However, Imo, Buckingham Palace and the Eiffel Tower are not so great. You can see the exterior of the Tower from many places in Paris. Going up in it is not necessary when you have such limited time. Other “big” attractions in Paris for you to see could be the Louvre, Notre Dame, Ste Chapelle, and Musee d’Orsay.
In London, the Tower of London, Hampton Court Palace, Windsor Castle, the British Museum, St. Paul’s Cathedral, and Westminster Abbey would be my choices. Taking a boat on the river to Greenwich is fun in itself ; and, there, you can see the Royal Observatory and the ship Cutty Sark. There is also the National Maritime Museum and the chapel of the Naval College, a less-visited, but stunning example of Addam plaster work. Greenwich is a good place for wandering.
I would choose Bath over Oxford.

I agree about Brussels, unless there's some compelling reason to go there. And with only four full days in Paris, I'd skip Versailles too. Likewise Oxford + Bath, maybe one or the other, but not both. You can certainly see a lot in the time you have for each city, and limiting the "big" sights each day will help you sustain the pace and appreciate the "little" things that make good memories. Do the "big" thing in the morning if you can, so you're more flexible later in the day.

Sights requiring timed entry, like the Louvre, Eiffel Tower, Borghese Gallery, and probably others on your list, leave you no choice but to buy advance tickets. In some cases, like the ET, that means you're taking a chance with the weather, but you really have no choice about that either. Sometimes it can be worthwhile to buy a ticket ahead just to avoid the time-consuming line at the location. You might have to commit to a specific day but not a time. Or you might benefit from a multi-site pass like the Paris Museum Pass.

You mentioned Buckingham Palace. Changing of the guard is a daily spectacle that requires a long outdoor wait if you want a good view. But in past Septembers the palace has been open for public visits (timed entry), a much more rewarding experience. I don't know whether that will be the case this year with the new king, but it's worth checking out.

"Assume you will return" is good advice from our host. It won't necessarily happen, but taking that attitude can help you enjoy what you have time to see and do "without moving at a dead run." You're much younger than many of us and I hope this is the first of many enjoyable trips for you.

EDIT -- Re Rosalyn's point about the Eiffel Tower, you might consider the Tour Montparnasse as an alternative, much easier to access and less weather-prone. But the ET is on a lot of bucket lists, maybe yours too. Having been to the top of both, I prefer the TM.

Have you booked your flights and trains yet? I know you said you had done a lot of research but it seems like a lot of zigzagging.

Some random thoughts:

• I understand that some gateway airports yield lower airfares, but if the difference is not too great, I'd look at grouping Paris-Amsterdam-London or Amsterdam-Paris-London. That way you'd eliminate the need for one of the two mid-trip flights you're currently stuck with. I don't claim this will make a big difference in your travel time; it's just that I find mid-trip flights a major buzz-kill.

• Personally, I'd rather have the non-stop flight on the way to Europe because that's the tougher direction for me. If I'm going to crash from exhaustion, I'd rather do it at home than when I'm paying a lot of money to be in Europe. There's also the slight possibility of a missed connection that cuts into your vacation time or causes your luggage to go astray (if you don't travel carry-on only). If I'm going to have one of those problems, I want it to happen on the way home.

• From the weather perspective, I'd prefer Rome (which can still be quite hot in September) at the end of the trip. (This point really conflicts with the two previous ones.)

• Unless I've misunderstood your plans, your Day 1 is the day you arrive in Europe. That is not a full day, and there's a good chance one or both of you will be significantly hampered by jetlag and sleep deprivation that day. I wouldn't count it as a day in Paris, figuring if I accomplished anything that day it would be a bonus. Therefore, by my count you have only three real days in Paris. If you can't shift a day from London to Paris, I'd give serious thought to skipping Versailles on this trip.

• The reason to book train and airline tickets in advance is to save money (potentially quite a lot of money). Unfortunately, the best deals on train tickets and flights are usually non-refundable. You must decide whether your savings are worth the risk that the trip won't happen for some reason, or that you'll have to shift the dates.

• Booking hotels as soon as you can is never a problem as long as you choose refundable reservations. This will probably yield some decent savings and will certainly give you more options of places to stay.

• One major reason to book (some) sightseeing tickets in advance is that some sights are so popular they sell out way in advance. The Vatican Museums and Colosseum in Rome are among the toughest tickets in Europe, and the Borghese Gallery and Domus Aurea definitely need to be booked in advance as well, if you want to see them. The Eiffel Tower is another problem sight, made worse by the weather issue already mentioned.

• Another reason to book (some) sightseeing tickets in advance is to avoid lengthy ticket lines. Few folks have so much time that they'll willingly stand in line for an hour or more to buy tickets. The Churchill War Rooms in London are a place for which you want to get tickets ahead of time. Otherwise, you might stand in line for a very long time and could conceivably find all the day's tickets sold out when you reached the ticket counter. These places don't necessarily require you to buy tickets really early--though that situation can change if the demand suddenly increases.

• There's also the occasional attraction for which tickets simply aren't sold on-site, so you have to buy the tickets online. This sort of purchase doesn't require action far in advance. The San Clemente church in Rome is an example.

• I wouldn't just automatically buy every ticket now. Some people who like to pre-purchase everything got burned back in 2020 when COVID shut down travel. Not all tickets were refunded. You really need to make an individual decision about every sightseeing purchase. The folks here can tell you which ones need early attention and which ones can wait until much closer to your departure date.

Hey there, sounds like a great itinerary for first-time visitors, if you travel light (really), are flexible, and can tolerate quite a number of travel days between places, meaning you have to pack, unpack, travel to & from airports, get your bearings in each new place, check in and out... you get what I mean. Realistically, this is a 20 day itinerary with 3 additional travel days, so let's call it 17.5 days, with maybe some fun little things on those days too.

but what we’re most looking forward to is wandering the streets, seeing the architecture and soaking up some of the history and character.

• So, my comments are with that in mind - I wish I remembered who on the forum said it, but think about 'Being there versus seeing there.' Personally, we want time to stop and smell our espresso, eat an actual sit-down lunch certainly in Paris & Rome, and have energy for an evening 'passeggiata', or stroll.

• Any chance you'd be willing to drop Amsterdam or London & have fewer destinations that each involve flying (except AMS to LDN)? Blasphemy I know, but London is an easy trip with cheap flights at times, I would consider that as a separate trip, easily worth a week to 10 days on it's own. And I agree with others about skipping excursions to focus on the city centers.

• Consider booking a food walking tour your first morning or evening in each city, rather than OMM (one more monument) so you can get a feel for good places to go back & eat, meet a local with some inside knowledge, and hopefully relax into the new city. We loved using "Eat Europe" but there are many recommended food tours on the Forum. Our most recent tour was Testaccio in Rome. https://www.eatingeurope.com/rome/taste-of-testaccio/

• Rome will be warm in September, I suggest getting out as early as you can, see the Pantheon first thing, wander the center & then head indoors in the afternoons to churches or museums. Mentioned by others, the Villa Borghese is our favorite museum in Rome, and requires advanced reservations. There is a LOT on the forum about Vatican City, Forum (lots of very warm walking) & Coliseum. Plenty of people here, including myself, would suggest skipping Vatican City entirely. Viewing the Forum by night & walking around the Coliseum when it's lit up is a fantastic alternative to actually entering those monuments. Hope you have a fantastic trip!

We went to the Changing of the Guard on a tour years ago and I don't remember anything about it. Another time-waster, in my opinion.

You've gotten lots of good advice and acraven is always a treasure trove of insights. I strongly recommend their advice is followed as far as booking in particular. The two items that stand out for your destinations are the Coliseum and the Anne Frank House. If those are priorities, you need to check the release schedule and set an alarm on your phone or you're likely to miss the opportunity. If cost is no object, you can book a third party guided tour of the Coliseum and those will be available much closer to your arrival date. Not only is it wise to book hotels with free cancellation, but tickets and tours through viator, tiqets, etc, will offer free cancellation up to 24 hours before the event on many things.

As a budget traveler, I avoid extra expenses, but my partner has reminded me often that I am paying for my time there already with hotels, tickets and time off work. Paying $15 more on a skip-the-line to gain an hour Rome instead of spending it in a line is an excellent value. (Some skip the line tickets don't even cost more... they just need to be booked ahead.). Taking a taxi from the airport in Paris is a good value. Less so with the others. (Express trains/trams are offered specifically for airport transport.). If easyjet is going into CIA instead of FCO, get a taxi.

We found easyjet to be perfectly suitable. They won't give you so much as a sip of water for free and if you have much luggage, it will probably cost more to bring than it costs to bring yourselves.

I am the opposite of acraven in terms of jet lag so I have to root for direct flight on the return. I find if I adopt the new schedule and go to bed early my first night in Europe, I'm generally good to go, while it takes me 4+ days when I return. Things are exhilarating on the way there, but delays and connections are painful on the return when you are looking forward to just being home. That said, Rome is hot. and crowded. (It's my favorite city in the world at the moment, so no aspersions, just a fair warning.) If that is an issue, the later in the year you go, the better.

I personally enjoy my first day and make use of it since most transatlantic flights arrive around 8am, but the first day in each city will be at least a little eaten up with getting your bearings, checking into your place and, unless you use a taxi or walk, acclimating to a new public transport system. It also depends on how well you sleep on a plane and if you get by well on a few hours or less. If you typically stay out late, the first day will feel abbreviated as it would be miserable and unwise to do so. I am up til midnight at home and I crashed around 8pm on each overseas trip. It makes sense for a lot of people to get checked in, take a stroll, get some food, rest and sleep on the first day. I don't have the temperament to be in my hotel when a city I want to see is just outside and I don't have the ability to nap, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.

I think your itinerary is delightful. I've been to all of those places and I think you've paced it really well and have given appropriate time to each place. I wouldn't bother with a day trip from Rome with only 4 days, but Paris much (much) smaller. I find one or two "big" things a day is ideal. Room left for wandering is the difference between visiting a city and loving it.

I am a bit of a maximizer, so I've ended up flying between cities quite a bit while in Europe as it's far less expensive than returning from the US. I strongly(!) prefer train travel, but it's been worth it when I've flown if it makes the itinerary make sense. It does have a way of wearing down one's patience and energy more than train travel. Busses are about as enjoyable as an airplane but at least they don't have the hours long commute/security/boarding.

If you have not yet purchased the air tickets, I would look at aligning the destinations is a straight line, i.e., start in Rome and finish in London ( or the reverse )

That reduces your intra-Euro flights to just one ( Rome-Paris)

On Brussels, I would skip it and visit Brugges.

Sandancisco, maybe this is what you meant. The comments are great.
https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/general-europe/going-to-see-or-going-to-be

Hey thanks so much, @TexasTravelmom! You have no idea how often I've quoted this, urging friends to cut back - a lot, usually 50% from their 'seeing' versus 'being' list. My best travel memories are always that odd little conversation, moment in a cafe laughing with the lady with vibrant red hair, and a kind waitress in Rome I so fondly remember.... Now that you've given me the exact post, I will probably add it to the occasional first time travelers' requests, if you don't mind!

Thanks so much to everyone for all the great advice! I really appreciate you taking the time to offer such detailed perspectives. I have not booked our transport yet and I have to get cracking, so I’ll definitely take all you’ve said into account. We are planning to travel light with one carry-on each and just do some laundry as we go to make the moves easier.

On our destinations, I’m most looking forward to London and hubby is most excited about Rome. We could easily drop the day in Brussels – I thought to tuck in a quick day trip because we’re just so close and have been told both Brussels and Bruges are worth a day – but it might not work with this schedule.

We are planning to use public transport exclusively – save for the occasional taxi - throughout our trip and lean into subway/trains where possible. The comments seem to indicate that’s doable. Excellent point that we need to account for acclimating to each city’s transit system. In New York and DC, I recall it took us a couple days before we felt comfortable that we knew how to get where we were going on the subway – and everything was in English – so thanks for bringing that to the front of my mind.

We have gotten into the habit of doing a first day small bus or walking tour to get our bearings when traveling to new cities here at home and had planned on doing that in Europe. I love the suggestion of making it a food walking tour.

I’m noting everyone’s input on attractions – there are some mentioned that I hadn’t been aware of. Thanks again for your time and generosity of knowledge. I’m sure I’ll be back with follow-up questions once I digest and discuss with the hubby.

Sandancisco, share away!

You’ve gotten lots of super good advice so far. Since you’re still considering Brussels, I’ll add my voice to the “skip Brussels” chorus. With just 3 full days, you will find so much to do in and around Amsterdam. Although it looks close on the map, Brussels is beyond a day trip in my book - an expensive two hour train journey both ways from Amsterdam Central.

My husband, adult daughter and I recently did Brussels as a quick day trip from Antwerp and found the Grand Place and surrounding area to be lovely but just overrun with tourists and not enjoyable at all for wandering. It was one of the few overwhelming, “let’s just get out of here” days of our 3 week trip.

Not to be a bother, but in consideration of the advice we've received and discussion of what is REALLY most important to each of us on this trip, we've considered a change to our itinerary.  I don't know if I should start a new post, but as much of the advice, still applies, I thought I'd just continue this post.  If you think I should start a new thread, please let me know.  This gives us more train rides (which we're looking forward to), only one flight, and puts Venice back on the menu which was an original goal that we had given up based on our original itinerary.  If 2 days in Venice is really pushing it, we could steal a day from Paris or London.  We're r​​​​eally relating to a perspective we received of "taking a small bite of a lot" - that feels like us.  This route feels more linear and gives us more time in the "big three".  Seem reasonable?  Anything you see I've overlooked?  Thanks in advance for your guidance.

Day 1 - Flight arrives in Rome @ 9:00am
Day 2, 3, 4, 5 - Rome (1 possible day trip)
Day 6 - Italo Treno train to Venice arrives @ 4:35pm
Day 7, 8 - Venice
Day 9 - Easyjet flight to Paris arrives @ 12:45pm
Day 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 - Paris (day trip to Versailles)
Day 15 - Eurotrain to London arrives 2:30pm
Day 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 - London (day trip to Bath)
Day 22 - Fly home from London

This looks great ! It goes I order, and gives you little tastes of all these places, including the two places that are the most important to each of you. I like it !

I think that is a real improvement. Happy Star, Happy Ron. Happy couple.

Have a wonderful trip. This now flows really well...

Thank you for the confirmation. We're going to go ahead and book our flights!