Tell me what to do for two days in Rome

[Anonymous]

Still no answer on time of year for this trip. Very relevant. If you are going in peak summer, for instance, places will be very crowded (can't just walk up to Colosseum, as others have said), and walking long distances will be absolutely exhausting in the heat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with PP and think you can't see a ton by walking around, and/or can combine with a short cab ride. Rome is actually one of my favorite cities for this, as there's a ton or stuff that is quite close together and basically every corner you turn has some super famous church/piazza/art/roman history.

For instance, you could do this easily in one day walking tour, stopping for lunch and gelato and/or pastries:

Trevii Fountain
Pantheon
Piazza Navona
walk along the river and cross the bridge
Castel Gandolfo, which has beautiful views of the city
There are also a number of churches along that walk that you can pop into if you want to see the art/culture. The big church at Piazza Navona is definitely worth going into.

Rick Steve's has a walking tour that we used -- there might be a better one though, I didn't think it was perfect for the purpose.

For the second day, you could do something like the Colosseum and Roman Forum/Palatine Hill. There is a church near there called San Pietro in Vinculo that has the famous Michelangelo statute of Moses. Tickets for Colosseum sell out early so buy those in advance if you want to do this. Also relatively close to that is a main street with the fancy shopping stores in Rome, if you're the kind of family that wants to do that.

ALternatively, you could get an early morning or late evening skip the line Vatican tour for your second day. If you do that, I would do Castel Gandolfo on that day because it's close/on the same side of the river, and add in something else to the first day -- you could do Roman forum/Palatine Hill as part of the first day (maybe take a cab between Piazza Navona, where there are tons of cabs and Palatine Hill). Campo Fiore is another option for that first day, but note that the market is day/time dependent--I kept missing it. There are some really nice pastry shops and pizza takout places between Piazza Navona and Campo Fiore. THere are also excellent pastry places in the neighborhood around the vatican.

For what it's worth, my least favorite touristy area was the Trevi Fountain. It's very crowded and feels like the kind of place you are apt to get pickpocketed. The food places near there were overpriced and not as good (although we had good gelato there, but I think it was double what we paid at Piazza Navona, which you would also think would be really touristy, but somehow felt much more like there were actual Italians just hanging out there.)

I appreicate the idea that sometimes you want to spend a week or two in a city and really soak it up, and for other trips you may just be using hte city as a base to fly into/out of and want to just have a day where you see some stuff without trying to see everything. We did that in Paris, where we just saw the Eiffel TOwer, Arc d' Triumphe, and had two meals.

You basically agree with the pp you said you disagreed with. You have to purchase Vatican tickets ahead and that’s half a day of touring. You agreed that they need to purchase colleague tickets ahead as well. This is what pp said. You missed sights that they would need to cab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

I realize you need tix ahead of time. I meant my family would take a vote this weekend to determine if we want to get tix before the trip and plan to carve out what seems to be half a day to do that tour. One kid already said they'd rather tour the Vatican/Sistine Chapel/St. Peter's than spend half the day at the Colosseum. I agree. Having watched videos on it, I feel like we would be fine walking around it, enjoying the view from outside, and moving on. We can do that during the day or evening since it's a 15 min walk from our hotel.

I'm hoping to hear from some folks who have a slightly less rigid approach to travel. I understand that many families might opt to spend the better part of a week doing formal tours of the major sites in Rome, but that's not what we hope to do.

Anyone else take a less structured approach to travel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

Disagree. We did a "small taste" tour of the Vatican that was either 2 or 3 hours that started before it opened to the public. They took us through the museums and showed us highlights with an art historian. We then went into the Sistene Chapel. Then the plaza area where the Pope speaks (I'm such a lousy Catholic -- can't remember what that's called!). Then St. Peter's itself, where she pointed out the highlights and then left us to spend as much or little time as we wanted. My husband and kids went home after that. I stayed to wander around the church a bit, debated going to mass, then decided to walk around Vatican City for a bit and have pastries, then walk back to our hotel near Piazza Navona and was back for a late lunch. That was all very do-able.

If your family is not an early morning family (we did the pre-opening tour), I would suggest the after-hours tour although that doesn't include St. Peter's itself (just the museum, sistene chapel, etc.). I think those are about 2 hours.

[Anonymous]

OP, you need tickets ahead for sights. That’s just how it is. You can walk but the sights aren’t near each other and would waste a lot of time and effort.
You need to have the kids pick few main sites, purchase those tickets and plan for public transportation at times. Especially with only 2 days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

Disagree. We did a "small taste" tour of the Vatican that was either 2 or 3 hours that started before it opened to the public. They took us through the museums and showed us highlights with an art historian. We then went into the Sistene Chapel. Then the plaza area where the Pope speaks (I'm such a lousy Catholic -- can't remember what that's called!). Then St. Peter's itself, where she pointed out the highlights and then left us to spend as much or little time as we wanted. My husband and kids went home after that. I stayed to wander around the church a bit, debated going to mass, then decided to walk around Vatican City for a bit and have pastries, then walk back to our hotel near Piazza Navona and was back for a late lunch. That was all very do-able.

If your family is not an early morning family (we did the pre-opening tour), I would suggest the after-hours tour although that doesn't include St. Peter's itself (just the museum, sistene chapel, etc.). I think those are about 2 hours.

This small taste tour you mentioned has to be purchased way before. It sound like op just wants to walk up and wait. That’s not happening. Also, it’s not just a 2-3 hr commitment any longer. They need to plan for more time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still no answer on time of year for this trip. Very relevant. If you are going in peak summer, for instance, places will be very crowded (can't just walk up to Colosseum, as others have said), and walking long distances will be absolutely exhausting in the heat.

Understood RE: the heat...which is why we'd prefer to take a low-key approach to the two days: the goal will be to just see some things and have fun. I don't want anyone to be bored or feel like they are being dragged from one scheduled tour to the next.

RE: walking to the Colosseum: I mean walk 15 mins from our hotel and admire it from the outside...wherever the best view might be. I realize there will be tons of people. Perhaps we head there super early? You know how you can admire the Washington Monument without actually touching it or going up to the top? Like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

I studied abroad in Rome and disagree with this unless someone in your party is disabled and out of shape. I walked all around Rome all the time and barely ever took public transport and saw everything.

First, skip the vatican. That frees up a lot of time.

You absolutely can just walk around Rome and see a ton. Walk by the Colisseum - you see a lot of it just from the street if you can't get tickets. You can walk by Trevi Fountain. You can walk up the stairs to overlook the Roman Forum. You can walk by the Wedding Cake and the Spanish Steps. Sit outside at cafes and eat pizza.

I really like the Villa Borghese. It's worth getting tickets for, IMO. Calm and pretty and quiet and a nice respite from Rome.

I did a report on the Church de San Clemente's underground and really liked it - not sure if it's still off the beaten path.

Go out in Trastevere, etc.

You absoultely can just spend a couple days walking around Rome and soak up the scenery and vibes without standing in lines and going into museums. And if you are fit you can walk nearly everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

Disagree. We did a "small taste" tour of the Vatican that was either 2 or 3 hours that started before it opened to the public. They took us through the museums and showed us highlights with an art historian. We then went into the Sistene Chapel. Then the plaza area where the Pope speaks (I'm such a lousy Catholic -- can't remember what that's called!). Then St. Peter's itself, where she pointed out the highlights and then left us to spend as much or little time as we wanted. My husband and kids went home after that. I stayed to wander around the church a bit, debated going to mass, then decided to walk around Vatican City for a bit and have pastries, then walk back to our hotel near Piazza Navona and was back for a late lunch. That was all very do-able.

If your family is not an early morning family (we did the pre-opening tour), I would suggest the after-hours tour although that doesn't include St. Peter's itself (just the museum, sistene chapel, etc.). I think those are about 2 hours.

It really would be silly to go to the Vatican and not your sistene chapel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

I studied abroad in Rome and disagree with this unless someone in your party is disabled and out of shape. I walked all around Rome all the time and barely ever took public transport and saw everything.

First, skip the vatican. That frees up a lot of time.

You absolutely can just walk around Rome and see a ton. Walk by the Colisseum - you see a lot of it just from the street if you can't get tickets. You can walk by Trevi Fountain. You can walk up the stairs to overlook the Roman Forum. You can walk by the Wedding Cake and the Spanish Steps. Sit outside at cafes and eat pizza.

I really like the Villa Borghese. It's worth getting tickets for, IMO. Calm and pretty and quiet and a nice respite from Rome.

I did a report on the Church de San Clemente's underground and really liked it - not sure if it's still off the beaten path.

Go out in Trastevere, etc.

You absoultely can just spend a couple days walking around Rome and soak up the scenery and vibes without standing in lines and going into museums. And if you are fit you can walk nearly everywhere.

Also, walk around Jewish ghetto, Camp de Fiori, Piazza Navona. Go to Giolitti's for ice cream and then swing by the Pantheon - it used to be you could just walk in but now I think it requires advance tickets. But you can see the outside of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you need tickets ahead for sights. That’s just how it is. You can walk but the sights aren’t near each other and would waste a lot of time and effort.
You need to have the kids pick few main sites, purchase those tickets and plan for public transportation at times. Especially with only 2 days.

Agreed, our family isn't especially rigid and definitely sleeps in. But for things in Rome I would pick top 2 or 3 things I want to see and get tickets for reasonable times we can make. Leave the rest of the time for strolling/vibing. Personally I loved Villa Borghese and the Colosseum/Palatine Hill the most. Also the Pantheon- I think you have to get tickets for that now- didn't used to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

Disagree. We did a "small taste" tour of the Vatican that was either 2 or 3 hours that started before it opened to the public. They took us through the museums and showed us highlights with an art historian. We then went into the Sistene Chapel. Then the plaza area where the Pope speaks (I'm such a lousy Catholic -- can't remember what that's called!). Then St. Peter's itself, where she pointed out the highlights and then left us to spend as much or little time as we wanted. My husband and kids went home after that. I stayed to wander around the church a bit, debated going to mass, then decided to walk around Vatican City for a bit and have pastries, then walk back to our hotel near Piazza Navona and was back for a late lunch. That was all very do-able.

If your family is not an early morning family (we did the pre-opening tour), I would suggest the after-hours tour although that doesn't include St. Peter's itself (just the museum, sistene chapel, etc.). I think those are about 2 hours.

This small taste tour you mentioned has to be purchased way before. It sound like op just wants to walk up and wait. That’s not happening. Also, it’s not just a 2-3 hr commitment any longer. They need to plan for more time.

OP here: to clarify, no, I do not intend to walk up and wait anywhere. If we opt to go inside the major sites, then I'll secure tickets or line up a private tour ahead of time (like, soon).

I was hoping to hear from people who haven't felt obligated to schedule multiple tours and still had a great time. I'd like to hear how they spent their time.

But I realize this is DCUM, and I suspect most people feel compelled to see and do everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

I studied abroad in Rome and disagree with this unless someone in your party is disabled and out of shape. I walked all around Rome all the time and barely ever took public transport and saw everything.

First, skip the vatican. That frees up a lot of time.

You absolutely can just walk around Rome and see a ton. Walk by the Colisseum - you see a lot of it just from the street if you can't get tickets. You can walk by Trevi Fountain. You can walk up the stairs to overlook the Roman Forum. You can walk by the Wedding Cake and the Spanish Steps. Sit outside at cafes and eat pizza.

I really like the Villa Borghese. It's worth getting tickets for, IMO. Calm and pretty and quiet and a nice respite from Rome.

I did a report on the Church de San Clemente's underground and really liked it - not sure if it's still off the beaten path.

Go out in Trastevere, etc.

You absoultely can just spend a couple days walking around Rome and soak up the scenery and vibes without standing in lines and going into museums. And if you are fit you can walk nearly everywhere.

Np
These people are there for only 2 days. You lived there. Of course you walked around all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

I realize you need tix ahead of time. I meant my family would take a vote this weekend to determine if we want to get tix before the trip and plan to carve out what seems to be half a day to do that tour. One kid already said they'd rather tour the Vatican/Sistine Chapel/St. Peter's than spend half the day at the Colosseum. I agree. Having watched videos on it, I feel like we would be fine walking around it, enjoying the view from outside, and moving on. We can do that during the day or evening since it's a 15 min walk from our hotel.

I'm hoping to hear from some folks who have a slightly less rigid approach to travel. I understand that many families might opt to spend the better part of a week doing formal tours of the major sites in Rome, but that's not what we hope to do.

Anyone else take a less structured approach to travel?

I’ve spent a ton of time in Rome and tend to be a less scheduled traveler. But frankly, if you will be in Rome in the high season, you do need tickets. It sounds like you understand that but just know you won’t get in the Colosseum if you just show up. It’s not a great place to walk around outside, FWIW. It’s a trafficky mess, not a great place to walk. The best part of the Colosseum is the inside.

If you are going in October — a fabulous time to visit Rome — you can be much more lackadaisical and spontaneous.

When are you going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rome is not condensed enough to walk around and see sights. They are spread out from one another. You could walk by the colleseum but won’t see what people go to see. Same with vatican, st Peters basicila, Sistine chapel, the forum. You have to go inside with ticket.
I guess you could walk by Trevi fountain if you can get up to it with the hordes of tourists and Spanish steps which is meh. But you can’t walk from one site to another throughout the whole city.

Why couldn't we walk 15 mins from our hotel to the Collosseum---maybe line up a tour ahead of time (we will take a vote on that)---and then walk back in the direction of Palatine Hill or Trevi or some such? I thought everyone walked around Rome?

Debating on how to handle St. Peter's and/or the Vatican. Most families I know who have been reported that their kids either felt overwhelmed by the crowd OR quickly lost interest. I'm wondering if there is a less hectic approach to just get a small taste rather than the whole enchilada?

I cannot stress to you enough on how you absolutely should not just arrive at the collosseum and think you can just line up for a tour ahead of time. You will never and I mean never get in that way. There is no small taste of the Vatican or St. Peter’s that you can do.
You really are not aware at all. I don’t think you understand.

Disagree. We did a "small taste" tour of the Vatican that was either 2 or 3 hours that started before it opened to the public. They took us through the museums and showed us highlights with an art historian. We then went into the Sistene Chapel. Then the plaza area where the Pope speaks (I'm such a lousy Catholic -- can't remember what that's called!). Then St. Peter's itself, where she pointed out the highlights and then left us to spend as much or little time as we wanted. My husband and kids went home after that. I stayed to wander around the church a bit, debated going to mass, then decided to walk around Vatican City for a bit and have pastries, then walk back to our hotel near Piazza Navona and was back for a late lunch. That was all very do-able.

If your family is not an early morning family (we did the pre-opening tour), I would suggest the after-hours tour although that doesn't include St. Peter's itself (just the museum, sistene chapel, etc.). I think those are about 2 hours.

This small taste tour you mentioned has to be purchased way before. It sound like op just wants to walk up and wait. That’s not happening. Also, it’s not just a 2-3 hr commitment any longer. They need to plan for more time.

OP here: to clarify, no, I do not intend to walk up and wait anywhere. If we opt to go inside the major sites, then I'll secure tickets or line up a private tour ahead of time (like, soon).

I was hoping to hear from people who haven't felt obligated to schedule multiple tours and still had a great time. I'd like to hear how they spent their time.

You need to schedule multiple tours. Walking around sounds nice, but not for Rome. Or if you were there for weeks.

But I realize this is DCUM, and I suspect most people feel compelled to see and do everything.