Skip Florence and Venice?

I am planning on roughly 12-14 days in Italy in May.
I love antiquity and so want to focus on Rome, Pompeii, Vesuvius, Paestum. I do want to see as much as possible but don't want to rush and want to have days of just lingering and wondering which is difficult to do if every day is packed.

thanks

If you're for SURE that you're going back then yes, you can save Venice and Florence for the next time. However, I think Venice is probably more of a must-see than Rome (in my opinion).

You will find all sorts of opinions about must-sees vs. not. I personally love Rome, but haven't been to Venice to compare. I enjoy Florence but I enjoy logical itineraries more. What will work best for you depends on 1) how much time you have, 2) whether you like whirlwind or slow travel, 3) what your interests are (art? canals? ruins?) and 4) whether or not you expect to be back (expect yes!)

If you have only a week or so, I would divide it geographically: Rome and south OR Florence and Venice. Northern Italy is usually easier to handle than south if you are not familiar with Italy in general.

But to answer your question, it is NOT ridiculous to go to Italy and not see Venice and Florence. It IS ridiculous to stress yourself out and drive up the cost of your budget while dropping the quality of your experience by dashing from place to place.

You are not telling us how many days you have total.
It is true that some people need more time to visit depending what they want to see and how fats they do it.
I saw about 85% of Rome in 3 days, inluding museums and a lot of walking.

I am going to break my own rule and say "it depends". For me personally, I would put Venice at the top of the list to see. I have not toured anywhere south of Rome however. So it depends on what drew you to your itinerary to begin with. But on a strictly IMO deal - Venice is wonderful and deserves at top spot. Good luck and regardless of what you decide - you won't have any regrets in Italy.
PS: it also depends on what time of year you are touring. I have heard Venice is not as nice when it is bitterly cold and I could see that point since it is a city for strolling. DANG, I broke my rule twice!!!

I, too, am torn. I liked both Venice and Florence more than Rome, but my focus was not really on antiquity and history. It sounds like yours is. To answer your question, I would say no it is not ridiculous to go there and not see Venice or Florence, but I think there is also an argument that it IS ridiculous to go there and rush through and just see Venice for a day, Florence for a day, etc. but if you DO want to see those cities, then I think you have to vow to yourself to go back someday (soon). For example, I badly want to see the Cinque Terre, but I did not go when I was in Italy for 2 weeks in 2007. I am vowing to go back, and hopefully sometime this fall. It sounds like you might be the type who prefers to spend a little longer in each city (which I fully support). Stick to the South this time and go back and hit Venice and Florence and wherever else for a few days each some other time. Trust me, as soon as you get home from one trip, you'll start planning the next one almost immediately ;)

Add in Herculaneum and Ostia Antiqua, too, which are right in the area you'll be. Given your schedule and that you want to linger, I think you're doing the right thing by cutting out Florence and Rome. The more I travel, the more I find that I enjoy seeing fewer places but spending more time in them. With the schedule you're contemplating you won't feel rushed, you'll be able to spend a day or more visiting a site or area such as Pompeii. So while it wouldn't be right for some, it sounds like you're realizing it would be right for YOU and that's what counts! Also, since there have been some posts saying "see Venice" I've been there twice, once on my own and once as part of a tour, and to me it was one time too many. I'd much rather wander in a hilltown or spend time on the Amalfi Coast, but that's my preference.

They are all great cities, but when I was in sorrento I said to myself that this is a place I could live. I love the amalfi coast. However, it depends on what you are looking for and what you enjoy. More antiquities in Rome and southern Italy. Great museums and art in Florence and the hill towns are really nice.

How long do you have?

Well, if you are young, or at least young at heart, 12 to 14 days and four stops is not a terrible pace. I applaud you for considering that it may be too much, but I think you are being conservative. Many comment that you will be back, so save it for another trip...true...but there are two ways to consider that. One is certainly that Venice will wait, explore Rome fully. But I would rather spend 3 days in Rome, hit the highlights, move on, and hit Rome again some other trip, delving a little deeper. With that in mind, you can spend three nights in each place, giving plenty of time for a good trip, just do not feel like you need to hit every site in Rome. Prioritize, plan two major sites each day, then fill with small things as time allows. Bottom line...go for it.

With an open jaw you can fly into Florence, get orientated and see alot easily in two days. There is just so much art and beauty. Then follow up with Amalfi and fly out of Rome (don't miss Ostia if you love antiquities 1/2 day). Two of my favorites. My first trip to Venice was pure magic and my second (both in june)it was so crowded and money grabbing and commercial I couldn't feel Italy and we left early. Not to say it's not an amazing site.

It's not ridiculous to leave Florence and Venice to another time at all. I saw nothing but Rome airport on my first 3 trips to Italy. I tend to like to spend time in just a few places and see them well, I hate the feeling of missing out on most of the sights if I try cram to much in. Personally I would focus on Rome and the south particularly with your interests. You will feel you have seen and done pretty much all you want to. If you leave out Florence and Venice then you will have to go back!

As always you have to decide what is most important for you to see.

For me Florence was a must see. Now that I've seen it I can skip it (but only because I've seen it) on future trips.

Venice was also a must see but it was magical. I will attempt to see it again any time I am close.

I really liked Rome and hope to go back. I haven't been South of Rome primarily because it's not a high priority for me.

We also loved CT (we were there late September). I would probably only go back if it was outside of tourist season because I wouldn't want to spoil the memory of quiet oceanside towns.

On future trips, I'll probably see both Rome and Venice and visit towns in between that we haven't seen before.

We spent 19 days in Italy and didn't see Venice. Didn't miss it either. And to our own surprise our favourit spot was neither Rome nor Tuscany (we did go to Florence) but the Sorrento peninsula and especially the little hikes we took there.

It's great to have choice and to be able to do it for your own individual taste. Personally, I don't like whirlwind tours and would base my choices on experiencing fewer places with more time.

Lisa.....I would say it depends on how long you are going to be there and what you would most like to see. Also whether or not you think that you will make another trip. For me, the big 3 are Venice, Florence and Rome. Our last trip, we flew into Venice in the morning and stayed 2 nights. Eurostar to Florence. Spent 4 nights (with side trip to San Gimignano and Siena for 1 day). Eurostar to Rome and spent 3 nights. We had previously been to Rome and Florence. I have now seen and done all I want for Rome (except maybe just an overnight stop in order to fly home in which case it would be a trip to the Trevi Fountain at night.....pure magic), but a future trip will have me go back to Venice for a couple of more nights and I don't think that I will ever tire of the Florence/Tuscany area. A lot more there that I would like to see and do.

If you really love antiquities then your priorities should be Rome, Florence and Venice in that order. Venice is one of my favorite cities, but that's based on the beauty of the city itself, not on antiquities.

Hi Lisa,
If you are able, Karen's suggestion of flying into Florence, train to the Amalfi coast and finish up in Rome sounds ideal for a 14 day trip. If not,I would recommend concentrating on Rome and south with maybe a day or 2 in a lovely place in the countryside outside of Rome for a change of pace. Although there will be plenty to keep you interested in Rome and AC. (My husband has been to Italy 5 times and has not seen Venice yet)

Lisa - our first trip to Italy was Rome then south to Pompeii & Amalfi Coast. It was wonderful. We've made 2 more trips since then and Italy still tops our list of places to go. We haven't seen it all yet, even though we have been some places (Rome, Tuscany, Pompeii) twice! So no, I don't think it is ridiculous at all to go and not see Florence and Venice on this trip. I think rather that you are a smart traveler who really wants to experience this wonderful place and not just check it off your list - have a great time!

I have a different opinion, which makes the world go round. See as much as you can with the time limits you have. Live for the day! You indicate "hopefully" That tells us that you might not. Yes. It will be a marathon of sightseeing. You will be tired. So what. Sleep on the plane. If you do your homework, and plan your sightseeing adventures, it can be done. I know, I have done it. My first trip to Europe I saw 5 countries and a dozen cities in just three weeks. All via train. It was a wonderful overview. I then have been able to return many times to those places I wished to see in detail. An example. In Paris I saw the Louve only from the grounds, did not have the time to go in. Too long a wait. Venice, Florence, Rome and other Italy destinations were other stops. You can do Venice and Florence in a day. Rome at least two. Venice by far is a drop dead wonderful place. If you go, you must take the train. Your breath will be taken away once you leave the station and see the Grand Canal.

Lisa
It depends on a number of things. First of all what is it you want to see and experience. One of the 7 habits of highly effective people is to begin with the end in mind.
Do you want to see a lot of sites and sights or experience a bit of relaxation and la dolce vita?
How important is ART? How important are history/antiquities? Is religion a factor? Would you like to see a Papal audience or Mass at St Peters?

Next how much ACTUAL time will you have for the trip. You'll lose basically 2 days for the plane travel each way. Then you lose basically half a day for each change of lodgings. A twelve day trip with four lodgings is basically an eight day trip.

Next your budget. Trains and busses cost money. Vapporettos and gondolas museum entrances all cost money.

Lastly, and maybe the most important consideration, is this a once in a lifetime trip or do you plan to return?

I'm an artist so Florence was "must see" for me and in fact is must see on each of our four-- and in May five trips.

Just a thought but if this is probably your only trip you could carve out three days head to Florence. You could either book open jaw and fly into Florence OR fly into Rome take the Leonardo to Termini and catch a Eurostar Rapido to Florence. (It's a lot easier than it sounds written out) see the important museums (reserve in advance)do Rick's Renaissance walk maybe work in the Boboli Gardens or walk the Oltrarno. Stop at a great winebar and sample some fabulous Tuscan wine with some salami cheese and olives. Day three take the day trip to Venice offered by CAF to see the highlights of Venice. Some friends took that tour and loved it.
From there head to Amalfi/ Sorrento Pompeii then finish up in Rome.

There's a lot of good advice listed already.

My opinion is to do Florence and skip Venice ... honestly I loved both cities, but as many people have mentioned it's very very touristy. In my opinion Venice has lost some of it's charm because of this.

Florence on the other hand is a much larger city and was the seat of the Renaissance. There is soooo much to do and see in Florence (not that there isn't in Venice). To me Venice is a neat city to see, but Florence is a city that has more breadth in what to see (I know people will disagree with this!)

Lisa, I know this doesn't pertain to your question, but I have seen that you are going to be visitng Paestum. I just wanted to tell you that you are in for a treat. The temples truly are beautiful. Have fun on your trip!

Amanda