Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Europe
I’ve never been to Europe. I may have the opportunity to go next year, and I need recommendations.
Suppose you were only able to go once in your life. Where would you go? What would you see? I’m biased toward anything to do with the Roman civilization, just because that era fascinates me. What I don’t want is to blindly go to Rome, only to discover that there is not much to see and the city is trashy. That’s why I need advice. I’m not set on Rome, or even Italy for that matter, if I can be convinced there is some place better.
I’m more inclined to enjoy architecture than a museum, and it would take a lot of historical interest to make up for a junky city and rude people.
Any and all advice is welcome.
Comments
-
Pmopeii?
Cobar | 4/16/2008 05:47 PM CDT -
Highly recommend Rome. Would suggest reading Rome Eyewitness Travel Guide by DK publishing to give you a really nice overview of the city. The city is not the worlds cleanest, between Minneapolis and Cairo, but I have never heard anyone say there is not much to see. If you have a fascination with Roman history is will be like visiting an old friend.
Dbltap | 4/16/2008 11:36 PM CDT -
Rome is a good start. The Imperial ruins are spectacular. You might also want to check out Pompeii as well. Kind of tourist-ey but still worth it.
Elijah | 4/17/2008 12:02 AM CDT -
I asked my wife about Rome, as she has been there. There is quite a bit left considering how long it has been. The Coliseum, Forum, Palatine Hill, the Triumphal Arch, etc.
She says there is enough that you probably won’t have enough time to see it all. She also says Rome is nice, and, as long as you do not act like an arrogant tourist the people are great.
Cobar | 4/18/2008 07:20 AM CDT -
I’ve had to cancel 4 trips to Europe in the past several years as I’m passportless at the moment ... my wife filed my personal papers “somewhere” and has yet to find my citizenship card and birth certificate.
That said, I haven’t been hassling her as it’s a convenient excuse ... I really don’t want to travel back there (previosu trips always included visits to relatives so that made it less painful).
You’ll have to forgive my acerbic reviews ... I dislike crowds and rude people, and most of my trips have been to places that were large cities.
With that out of the way, it’s hard to view any city in western Europe and not see marvellous architecture. The ones I have enjoyed most are: Antwerp, Amsterdam, and Munich. Oh, and London, of course. Paris was ok, and much easier to get around (not speaking French) than I’d have imagined.
Holland is incredibly easy to visit, since almost everyone speaks some English. France is the reverse, where one has a hard time outside major centers. Rome has marvellous artchitecture but possibly the worst drivers in the world.
I think if I do go back this summer/fall and can manage the extra time, I’d like to see some of the eastern cities, such as Sofia and Prague since the Russians managed to keep them in the dark ages for so long ... little boring new construction.pete in Midland | 4/18/2008 09:51 AM CDT -
I hope I’m not resurrecting a dead thread, but a fairly quiet place with a good deal of Roman history is the Southeast part of France. There is a mostly-intact Roman arena in Nimes, still in use. Avignon is still a walled city, and once housed a Pope. There are also Roman excavations in the area that you can wander through at your leisure (although I forget the name of the town where we found them).
Roger Ritter | 5/13/2008 08:00 PM CDT
