first time

Florence! It's closer to Rome (only 2.5 to 3 hours by train). Since your total trip time is short I would suggest keeping your cities close together. Florence is beautiful especially if you are like me -fascinated by Renaissance art and history. Florence is home to some of the world's most precious artworks and was the birthplace of a the idea that art is storytelling (see the David, but also see the Mary Magdaline in Duomo Museum). Florence's political and religious history is thrilling (read about the crazy monk Savanarola). And, like Rome, it is totally walkable.

Linda is right about Florence being closer. It also has a enough must sees to keep any tourist busy for days.

On the other hand Venice is magic. You can experience it nicely in a couple of days, especially by roaming around in the early morning or at night.

If I had to choose, I'd take Venice because it's such a unique place.

I think every first timer must go to Rome and Florence. So this is another vote for Florence.

Just to Keep it balanced. Venice, Venice, Venice!!!!!

I love Florence...it is one of my favorite cities. That said, I think that the experience that Venice offers is not similar to visiting another city...it's like visiting another planet.

It is totally unique and enchanting. For a first-timer, it will be an absolute thrill. And, though walkable, nearly impossible to get too lost (unless, like most people, you want to).

Once you visit Italy, you'll return like we all do. Florence will be there forever...I'm not as certain about Venice.

Agree that Venice is in a fragile state, but oh, Florence was nearly lost when the Arno flooded it banks in 1966! And some of its most prized possessions were totally lost in that flood.

HAs anyone given any real thought to losing Venice? I know that it is sinking very very slowly, but I was shocked to see the water ankle deep in san Marco, and also inside the cathedral! living on the first floor of any building in Venice is risky noiw from the tides, and flooding. It will be sad to lose it. We put a man on the moon, surely we can stop a city from sinking. Jeff

Hi Jennifer. I love both Florence & Venice but I think for the sake of time, I would choose Florence. You will spend a lot of time in transit between Rome & Venice & then Venice to Milan if you choose Venice. I would save Venice for another trip.

Venice!

Florence! Florence! It's only 1-1/2 hrs by (fast) train from Rome. We just came back from 5 days in Florence and we fell in love with the city and the people. Weather was beautiful, and there were no long lines to see the major attractions. It's a fascinating city - everything I've read about the renaissance came to life!

Mila

Hi Jennifer. I think we need more information. What are your interests?

I was in your position, a first timer, a few months back. We were traveling with my 12 year old son in March and were debating the same two cities. We chose Venice, and I'm glad we did.

It didn't take long to get there and Venice was absolute magic. I chatted on the train with a woman from Sweden who comes to Florence every year, twice a year. She said that Florence is for art appreciation, so if that's your interest, then by all means. She wasn't a fan of Venice, but me? I fell in love with Venice. We stayed in a more residential, quieter area and I thought it was pure bliss. You will never see anything else like it.

And when you return to Italy, and you will, go to Florence!