I think it’s doable. I’d give yourselves a good four days in Paris, London, and Rome, and no more than two in Venice. Flying often is cheaper, but it’s not the best idea unless you’re covering a really long distance. I’d definitely use trains within Italy, between Paris and Amsterdam, and between Paris and London (take advantage of specials on the Eurostar trains and it’s reasonably priced, and goes from city center to city center, unlike flying). Most people here would tell you to skip the tours. I looked briefly at some of the Top Deck offerings and the pace is ridiculous – 1.5 days each for Paris, Barcelona, Florence and Rome, etc.? I hope all their tours aren’t like that. Your trip is easily, and probably much more enjoyably, done on your own.

Hi augustin25! Thank you for your reply.
Yeah I would definately look at specials! Thanks.
Even tho I knew it was crazy I was kind of tempted by Topdecks tours since they cover alot a ground in such a short time. But you’re probably right in saying that we’ll enjoy it alot more going at our own pace.

My general Itinerary idea is-
Rome-3 1/2days
Florence-2 1/2days
Venice-2 1/2days
Prague-2 1/2days
Amsterdam-3 1/2days
Paris-4 1/2days
London-4 1/2days

Which will take roughly 24days (if my maths is right), which gives us enough time to travel from here and back within the 4 weeks.
I hope it’s not going to be too rushed but looks like it might be…haha…

Seems pretty good, that’s not too rushed.

If it were me I’d give Venice 1 1/2 days and add to Prague. Wife & I dedicated a good solid 10 hour day to walk around Venice and that was enough to see it all…and Prague was our favourite city on the trip. Packed with charm.

Rome is definitely a 3+ day city, Amsterdam is probably at its limit with 3 1/2 days, IMO.

Looks like a great trip, have fun.

I am just going to give you some ideas nothing to broad

London Sundial
London Mint Tower of London.
Tower Bridge
Brown’s Cafe and Brassiere Shades Piazza Sandwich Bar (Food).
Design Museum

Annie
LINK REMOVED BY MODERATOR

Some people like to spend only a few days in a place; others like to stay longer and see more. Only you and your husband know which kind you are.

My suggestion would be to visit internet sites, and the library, for information on just what there is to see in each of your proposed destinations, and make a list of everything you might want to see (your list should exceed what you absolutely must see, as it is not unlikely that one of your must-sees will be closed when you get there). Don’t hesitate to omit sites that other people recommend that don’t suit your interests, nor to include sites that other people pan, but which interest you. For example, we just came back from Vienna. Many people laud the Spanish Riding School, but we’re not particularly interested in prancing horses, so it was way down our list and we never got there. On the other hand, we went to their main art museum four times and enjoyed it, while many other people might not go at all.

Once you have your list, you will be in a good position to see how much time you will want to spend in each venue. For example, if you find 100 sites of interest in and around Paris (many people like to visit the Normandy invasion sites while staying in Paris), three or four days isn’t enough time, and you may have to save some venues for your next trip.

As for travel within Europe, trains are far more comfortable and let you see some scenery while going right to the heart of town. Discount airlines fly from inconvenient airports (for the most part) and have some strange rules regarding luggage; often you have to pay more for your suitcase than for your seat.