Please sign in to post.
Holiday Sale! Save 20% Storewide!

Honeymoon in Italy

Posted by (Edmonton, AB, Canada) on

I have backpacked Europe before and Rome (5 days/5 nights), Florence (1 day) and Venice (4 days/4 nights) were part of the trip. Last time i felt there on my previous travels there was way more to do in Rome. This time i will be taking my future wife to be and will only have 4 days/nights in Rome and 3 days/nights in Venice. I'm wondering if i should cut down Venice to 2 full days and give Rome 5 days. Anyone agree or disagree? Maybe she will find Venice very romantic but last time i felt Venice was more for strolling around enjoying the architecture than actually visitng many sights.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Posted by
1127 posts

There is more to do in Rome than in Venice. What time of year are you traveling? If it is during a rainy month you may be better off spending more time in Rome than Venice. Venice is a magical, wonderful place and you may enjoy it more with your wife than the traveling companions you had in the past.

Posted by
14 posts

Sam, we'll be there at the beginning of July. We'll have 3 and a half days in Rome. Then take the train to Venice arriving in Venice early afternoon. So then the half day + 2 more days + a half day before taking the train to Munich at 1:30 in the afternoon.

Posted by
3313 posts

I personally think Rome is a 3 night, two full day city; one day for ancient Rome, one day for the Vatican and baroque Rome. I spend more time in Venice because its such a different atmosphere and there are so many surprising sights to find.

Posted by
1127 posts

Keep your schedule as is. You will loose most of day traveling.

This topic has been automatically closed due to a period of inactivity.