Anonymous wrote:Are you the kind of person that lkrs wandering through a city and poking into shops and cafes? If so. I’d just do Rome. There really is more than enough to occupy 3-4 days there.
If you like moving quickly, and alsp feel like you don’t know when you’ll ever get a chance to go back and see Florence, then I think I’d do both. That last point might be the biggest factor. If this is a once in a lifetime trip to Italy due to finance or other life circumstances, I think I’d try to do both. People on this forum tend to travel a LOT so tend towards “oh just do the one thing—you can do that other think next time you’re there.” But if you really think there will likely not be a next time. I can see trying to do both as a valid choice.
This. We like to travel to new and different destinations, so basically assume when we go somewhere it’ll be a very long time before we get back there and so try to fit a reasonable amount into a trip. With the amount of time you have, both cities are absolutely doable in that time frame.