A little extra Rome or a glimpse of Milan?

[NalCruiser]

Need opinions!

 

we want to fly in to either Rome or Milan and then take a train from either to Venice to board cruise.

Would you do Milan or Rome (for that extra day or so)?

 

Pros for Rome are that we would have a little more time there than just ship port time, but also its a little further to travel to from Venice.

 

Milan has the famous Last Supper painting and a shorter trip to Venice and will not be a stop on the cruise itinerary..

 

thoughts?

[dogs4fun]

Need opinions!

 

we want to fly in to either Rome or Milan and then take a train from either to Venice to board cruise.

Would you do Milan or Rome (for that extra day or so)?

 

Pros for Rome are that we would have a little more time there than just ship port time, but also its a little further to travel to from Venice.

 

Milan has the famous Last Supper painting and a shorter trip to Venice and will not be a stop on the cruise itinerary..

 

thoughts?

 

No contest for me ... I would opt for Rome. There is SO much to see in Rome that even a month is not enough time for me. :D

 

In Milan, I enjoyed seeing the Last Supper at Santa Mariadella Grazie Church (must be booked in advance), Castello Sforzesco, the Duomo & La Scala. That was pretty much all I cared to see in Milan.

 

Rome has the Colosseum, Forum, Trajan's Forum & Market, Trajan's Column, Palantine Hill, Pantheon, Trevi Fountain, Castel St. Angelo, Vatican necropolis, St. Peter's basilica, Piazza Navona, Vatican Museums, Capitoline Museum, Borghese Gardens, Borghese Museum, Baths of Diocletian, Baths of Caracalla, Etruscan museum, catacombs, aquaduct park, etc........ loads more to see!

To say nothing of the the many churches that contain fabulous works of art and the wonderful food in Rome.

 

Awesome day trips from Rome:

Tivoli (for Hadrian's villa & Villa d’Este)

Ostia Antica

 

BTW, I have taken the train from Rome to Venice. Yes, longer than Milan to Venice, but oh, so worth it, IMHO.

 

jill

[NalCruiser]

one for Rome!!

 

why is the train so worth it? (as in, is it a different(better) route than that from Milan to Venice?

 

 

rome of course we will see on the cruise... but not Milan

I hear Milan is more cosmopolitan

I would be thrilled anywhere

[cruisemom42]

Rome, Rome, Rome!

 

I'm curious who might have told you that Milan is more cosmopolitan than Rome? It's harder to get more cosmopolitan than a place that has been a (sometimes "the") world capital for millenia -- the head of one of the greatest Western civilizations and one of the world's great religions, etc.

 

(btw, I think dogs4fun was implying that even though the train from Rome to Venice is longer, it is worth the extra distance to spend the time in Rome.)

 

If you are still in the planning stages, you should plan to spend at least 2 days in Rome before your cruise and preferably 3.

 

I will be in Rome for my umpteenth visit in April and I am still finding new things to do and see.

[dogs4fun]

one for Rome!!

 

why is the train so worth it? (as in, is it a different(better) route than that from Milan to Venice?

 

 

rome of course we will see on the cruise... but not Milan

I hear Milan is more cosmopolitan

I would be thrilled anywhere

 

Sorry if I was unclear. It isn't the train that is "so worth it". The longer train ride is worth it in order to spend the extra time in Rome rather than Milan. :)

More cosopolitan? I wonder what that means ... the Italian fashion industry is kinda headquartered in Milan ... other than that, I don't understand in what way(s) Milan would be considered more cosmopolitan than Rome. I would be interested in the answer to this.

jill

[CathyCruises]

Rome hands down. Milan has nothing to offer to come close to competing.

[ab0si]

Rome, Rome, Rome!

 

I'm curious who might have told you that Milan is more cosmopolitan than Rome? It's harder to get more cosmopolitan than a place that has been a (sometimes "the") world capital for millenia -- the head of one of the greatest Western civilizations and one of the world's great religions, etc.

 

 

What millenium was that? Rome was capital of Roman Empire for less time than most people think.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

Another vote for Rome. You should do at least two- three nights in Rome pre-cruise especially if you are taking the train to Venice which is about 4 hours.

 

This way when you dock in Civitavecchia, you can use that time either relaxing onboard or doing a different excursion. We did Orvieto on our recent cruise and it was a wonderful excursion. I highly recommend.

 

As for Milan- I stayed in Milan once and was unimpressed. It is a modern city with a few old landmarks- whereas Rome has so much to offer and there are no high rises at all.

 

If you are interested in doing Northern Italy though- I did love Lake Como and there are buses from Milan airport there, as well as trains to Como or Varenna from Milan Central. Lake Como is really lovely and I'm glad I went there.

[cruisemom42]

What millenium was that? Rome was capital of Roman Empire for less time than most people think.

 

What I said is that it has been a world capital for millenia. Meaning off and on for millenia. Sometimes capital of an empire, sometimes head of a spiritual empire, sometimes capital of a united Italy.

 

Trust me, I know my Roman imperial history. ;) (And her empire already existed well before there was an actual "Imperator" to rule it; in fact, the need to more effectively rule the unruly empire was a significant reason for the demise of the Republic.)

[dogs4fun]

What millenium was that? Rome was capital of Roman Empire for less time than most people think.

 

I don't believe that anyone stated that Rome was the capitol of the Roman Empire for millenia.

It is a fascinating city ... IMHO, one of the most fascinating in terms of historical significance to western civilization.

Rome's history spans more than 2.5 thousand years. It is Italy's largest and most populous commune. It was the capitol city of the Roman empire, the Roman Rupublic & the Roman Kingdom & is regarded as one of the birthplaces of western civilization. Rome has been the Papal seat since the first century AD and, after the fall of Constantinople, it became the capitol of the Papal States. In 1871, Rome became the capitol of the Kingdom of Italy & in 1946 it became the capitol of the Republic of Italy.

Oops ... must have been typing while CruiseMom was posting. Sorry ... didn't see the previous post.

jill

[cruisemom42]

I don't believe that anyone stated that Rome was the capitol of the Roman Empire for millenia.

 

Oops ... must have been typing while CruiseMom was posting. Sorry ... didn't see the previous post.

jill

 

LOL, we seem to be the only ones who can interpret each others' posts today.

:D

[Waihekean]

If you have not been to Rome as yet, then Rome is a must and you want to spend at least a couple of days there.

 

If you have a particular intensive cruise a great option is to visit Rome first then use the Rome day on the cruise as a sea day. While everyone is rushing around to cram as much in that particular day (including travel), you can have a leisure day at the pool:D

[elaine5]

Been to both several time--go to Rome--but if you must go to Milan, then head straight for Verona! So, depending on flights, etc., Milan would be fine if you then hop on the train and go to Verona. If you are in Verona in the summer, you could try to snag an Opera ticket--or at least standing room for an hour or two.

Rome is just fabulous--so much to do. One of my favorite European cities.

[ksps cruise fan]

Need opinions!

 

we want to fly in to either Rome or Milan and then take a train from either to Venice to board cruise.

Would you do Milan or Rome (for that extra day or so)?

 

Pros for Rome are that we would have a little more time there than just ship port time, but also its a little further to travel to from Venice.

 

Milan has the famous Last Supper painting and a shorter trip to Venice and will not be a stop on the cruise itinerary..

 

thoughts?

 

I'll be the contrarian to this long list of posters recommending Rome over Milan. It's not that I disagree with everyone's claim that Rome has far, far more to see than does Milan. I simply feel that there are enough really appealing sites in Milan for the one day pre-cruise time the OP is considering. If NalCruiser adds at least two more days, I'd join the Rome chorus, but that doesn't seem to be an option.

 

Actually, even if NalCruiser adds two days, I still might be inclined to stay in the north, adding Verona and possibly Vicenza and Padua en route to Venice.

 

I plan my trips with the hope and expectation that I will come back to Italy. I prefer to spend more of my time having experiences -- seeing sites, eating wonderful meals, people watching in a piazza -- than riding a train to a great-but-distant destination. Milan plus Verona don't equal Rome in terms of historic or architectural importance, but these would satisfy me more than 3-3 1/2 hour train ride from Milano Centrale to Roma Termini. (Not to mention the 3 hour- 40 minute train ride from Roma Termini to Venezia S. Lucia.)

[cruisemom42]

I plan my trips with the hope and expectation that I will come back to Italy. I prefer to spend more of my time having experiences -- seeing sites, eating wonderful meals, people watching in a piazza -- than riding a train to a great-but-distant destination. Milan plus Verona don't equal Rome in terms of historic or architectural importance, but these would satisfy me more than 3-3 1/2 hour train ride from Milano Centrale to Roma Termini. (Not to mention the 3 hour- 40 minute train ride from Roma Termini to Venezia S. Lucia.)

 

The OP has the possibility of flying into either Rome or Milan, according to their post; they are not locked into Milan. Thus the only difference in transportation would be the approximately one-hour longer journey from Rome to Venice vs. Milan to Venice (leaving Verona out of the equation).

 

Since they are still in the planning stages, I don't see why they couldn't consider adding another day pre-cruise in Rome.

[ksps cruise fan]

The OP has the possibility of flying into either Rome or Milan, according to their post; they are not locked into Milan. Thus the only difference in transportation would be the approximately one-hour longer journey from Rome to Venice vs. Milan to Venice (leaving Verona out of the equation).

 

Since they are still in the planning stages, I don't see why they couldn't consider adding another day pre-cruise in Rome.

 

 

As Emily Litella famously said, "Never mind."

[QueScaisJe]

Interesting thread, as my immediate reaction was "Rome, of course."

 

But then I began to think (a dangerous course of action to be sure), and it seems to me that I always end up in Rome but seldom Milan. I fly into/out of Rome; I take trains to/from Rome; I sail in/out of Rome. I've probably visited Rome more than any other European city, and I remember fondly my time there...

 

Rome certainly offers more, but for a traveller who has seen much of Rome and environs, Milan might not be so easily dismissed.