Pompeii vs Herculaneum

They are the same...but different. Ercolano is smaller but less destroyed and less crowded. You will see more intact buildings. We visited each site on successive days and were entranced by both. At Ercolano you can better visualize what a typical Roman city of the day looked like.

The city of Ercolano has nothing to recommend it, but neither is is frightening or unsafe. Just boring until you get to the scavi.

I prefer Herculaneum to Pompeii. In a way you get a better feel for the destruction caused by the volcano as the town is well below the current ground level. When we left, we actually went through a tunnel up through the volcanic overlay - spooky! It is very different from Pompeii and you will get a totally different experience and I am sure your travel partner will be intrigued. Look for the areas surrounding the site where you can see walls, etc eroding out of the overlay. Most of the Roman town is still buried beneath the modern town but you will see houses, shops, tavernas, public bath, also of note are the warehouses by the old waterfront where many of the townspeople who couldn't escape took refuge only to be smothered.

We visited both sites this past September with a wonderful tour guide. He insisted that we visit Herculaneum first because as Laurel said, it would give us a better sense of what Pompeii was like since the buildings at Herculaneum are more intact. I personally liked Herculaneum better as well but can't imagine traveling all the way to that area and not seeing Pompeii, especially if you're traveling with someone who may not ever return to the area or to Italy. Can you consider visiting both sites? Herculaneum can be seen in just a few hours. Also, if you're interested in using a guide to make the sites come alive, let me know and I can give you the contact info for the guide we used.