If you had the opportunity to spend 3 months in London or Rome, which would you choose and why?

Question

I've never been to London before, but I have been to Rome (only for 3 days though) and I absolutely loved it. I'm having a hard time making a decision, so any input at all is appreciated! Thanks!

Answer 1

I, too, would chose London.  I would recommend getting a BritRail pass so you can tour the countryside as well as the city.  So much to see, so much to do.

http://www.britishrail.com/

Cheerio!

Answer 2

Rome. London is way to expensive, because England is one of the most expensive places in th eworld. I'd be broke, so I'd go with Rome. I've always prefered Italy anyways.  :)

Answer 3

Hi,

Perhaps in your case, I would choose London. At least you've already been to Rome - though, obviously,  for too short of a stay.

I've been watching Globe Trekker for years and there are so many places I'd like to check out that, if given the option, I'd rather try a new and different destination for a trip instead of a previous one.

Another way to think of it might be....to go to a different area in the same country. For example, even if I had visited Rome for just 2 or 3 days, the next time I'd go to Italy I'd consider Northern Italy, for example.

Good Luck with your decision!

Answer 4

Rome, it's closer to Greece

Answer 5

rome...city of romance.....who wouldnt fall in love  with this romantic city?....so much history...and the people are great......