My friend and I are leaving for our France/Italy vacation (it's the first time to Europe for both of us and we both really want to see France and Italy) on May 13 and returning home on June 2. For a while now I've been planning on flying into Paris, train to Provence or French Riviera, train to Venice, train to Florence, train to Rome, and fly home from Rome. I'm wondering if instead we should do this backwards? Rome, Florence, Venice, French Riviera or Provence, and then Paris? Would it make any difference in comfort levels due to temperatures, etc, anything that you can think of? Thanks! I've checked airfare for both ways and they are nearly the same.
Posted by
Texan in CA
4415 posts
I would recommend Paris first - to me, it's less ummm, 'foreign' than Italy. A bit more user-friendly. While I love Italy, I'm very glad my first several days of my first European vacation didn't start there - I needed some travel experience under my belt first. Having said all of that, I certainly don't recommend against starting in Italy if that's how things shake out...I've 'heard' the enthusiam in your previous posts, so I'm not worried for you one way or the other ;-) I can tell you'll be thrilled to be there, wherever 'there' is! I wouldn't let the weather 'choose' for me which place I start in, in this particular case. For me, the differences aren't great enough, and as far as crowds go I think you'll just miss the beginning of the summer rush.
Posted by
Sacramento, California U.S.A.
10595 posts
What Eileen said!
Posted by
Seattle, WA, USA ☔️
6788 posts
Yep, good advice so far. I agree. The only other as-yet unmentioned factor that could figure in to the decision is language skills. If either of you speak Italian well, then that could make your initial landing and European orientation easier in Rome. Otherwise, I'd give Paris the edge. I think Rome is slightly more "challenging" for the first time visitor, a little more chaotic, a little harder to find your way around in, a little less well-organized for a jetlagged newbie whose head is still spinning a bit. That's not to say Rome is all that difficult, but I think Paris is a bit easier. You'll have a great time. Enjoy!
Posted by
OP
Charleston, SC, USA
62 posts
Thanks for all the replies! I didn't even consider how starting in Paris might be easier due to language. We both know a moderate amount of French, but no Italian. Good call.
Posted by
Diamondhead, MS
132 posts
I'm going to go against the grain. Even though I agree that Paris is less challenging due to language. I loved Paris, Venice and Florence so much I kept comparing Rome to them. That's not fair to Rome. I would go in reverse order. Of course Notre Dame will look like a small poor country church by the time you get to Paris. But Saint Chapelle will probably still wow. Either way. Have fun.
Posted by
Washington, DC
888 posts
I think I just replied to your other post about reservations and now I know where you are going. Book your hotels as soon as you can and get your rail tickets in Italy when you get there. Check out the Rick Steves' Italy guidebook about which museums/sites to book in advance as there will be some of those in Italy, not so much in Paris. A guidebook will let you know exactly which museums/sites to book in advance.
As for the order, I think you should start in France and then make your way to Italy. Looks like you are wanting to train it all, but do look at the cheaper flights between cities offered in Europe. This website should help: www.whichbudget.com. Make sure you read their terms regarding luggage constraints.