Some much needed input on first trip to Rome

Welcome.

You will get various views on this, but if it were my first trip to Rome, I would look at:

• six nights Rome
• three nights Florence
• two nights Naples

Or better, have three nights in Naples if (a) you actually have 12 nights in-country, and (b) you have a passion for visiting Pompeii and Herculaneum as well.

So yes - I think 11-12 nights is over-cooking Rome substantially, Florence and Naples are very long day-trips, and you would short-change yourself if you saw only Rome.

You will also get different views on where to stay in Rome, but we have enjoyed (a) the precinct bound by the Pantheon, Piazza Navona, and Campo de' Fiori, and (b) just across the river in Trastevere.

For major attractions (Vatican, Colosseum / Forum, Uffizi), it's a good strategy to buy tickets online before you travel. Worth buying your fast-train tickets well in advance too - they can be steeply discounted.

And if you can book your flight home for afternoon / evening, you don't have to "waste" a final night in Rome just to catch a morning flight.

Have a great trip!

There are dozens, indeed hundreds, of worthwhile places in Italy which could occupy your time for years. You can't reasonably expect to do justice to the whole country in twelve days.

Twelve days is longer than most people spend in Rome, and unless you specifically want to concentrate on that city (which you don't), then I would consider a two-centre holiday. This will give you some contrast. Typical advice on this forum for for a first-time visitor is four full days for Rome (I mean full sightseeing days), to which you can add day trips for Tivoli and Ostia Antica if they interest you.

This leaves you enough time to move on to Florence. There's enough to do there for at least three full days, and numerous day-trip options in surrounding towns. There are lots of relevant threads on this forum.

Naples is doable as a day trip from Rome, with fast train options. Much as I like Naples, however, the more interesting things to do in that part of Italy (IMHO) are outside Naples, and this region is best saved until you have the time for it.

In twelve days, some people will try and do the 'holy trinity' of Venice, Florence and Rome. Personally I think that option needs at least two weeks - Venice and the islands needs four full days.

If you're sticking to city centres, travel by train. There's no need for a car.

Fly 'open jaw', in to one city and out of another, to avoid wasting time back-tracking.

As above...it is longer than most people spend in Rome.There is a lot to see and do there,and personally I would have no problem staying there that long....I've spent a lot more days than that in total there.

Its also true that there is a lot more to see outside of Rome (you would need years of travel to see all the interesting things in Italy).

I wouldn't do day trips from Rome to those other places.I'd probably go with something like #1 suggests above...maybe 3 days each for Naples and day trips from there to surrounding places (eg Pompeii)and 3 days in Florence.Depending on your interests.

I suggested three nights Florence, and three nights in Naples (if they have 12 nights total) ... rather than days, and the balance in Rome. You tend to have to be a bit precise about these things!

Another one saying 2 or 3 centres, but with about half your time in Rome. Just how long elsewhere might depend on your interests - for example if you really wanted to see both Pompei and Herculaneum, and thus also the Archaeological museum in Naples, I would seriously consider 3 days /4 nights there unless you are super fit with lots of stamina - equally if you are a culture vulture ticking off loads of art museums, then a similar imbalance in favour of Florence would be worthwhile. Both trenitalia and italo trains run the high speed services between these cities.
Understand too that the "problem" with Italy is that nearly all the smaller places between these big cities are packed full of interesting stuff, so be aware you are only scratching the surface in Italy in 12 days. It would be perfectly possible to fill all 12 days holiday in any one of these cities and never go more than 30 or 40 miles on day trips. But I think your initial plan is a good introduction to Italy - just make notes for your return visit!!

Yes ... I'll slightly revise my recommendation:

• 5 nights Rome
• 3 nights Florence
• 3 nights Naples

That is a really good mix on a first trip. With your four full days in Rome, take one (or at least half one) to head out by train to Tivoli, to see Villa d'Este and Hadrian's Villa ... they are excellent.

Sarah,
I admire your style that you would consider a longer chunk of time in Rome. Too few folks seem to have the open mind needed for such a notion. Lots of great advice above. If you want a suggestion for an intriguing daytrip out of Rome, maybe consider Ninfa Gardens (train to Latina then easy cab). Visitors must sign up ahead to reserve their date/time. Worth every effort.
Also, an alternative idea for your 12 days: divide them between Rome and (only) one provincial town selected by you for its being the antithesis of a popular A-list tourist attraction. Endless choices.
Bonne chance!
I am done. The end.

Slow travel can be relaxed and leisurely, however there's always the risk that the sightseeing expands to fill the time available. So you can wind up seeing no more in five days than you could have seen in three days, and so on.

I definitely want to see the sites but I also want to experience the place. Which is why I was leaning towards staying in one city. You’ve given a ton for me to think about though!