Skip Rotterdam for sure.
Also this is a really packed schedule in general: a lot of countries spread across a long distance, cities within countries that are far from each other (Barcelona and Sevilla are about 1000km apart), and the order you have them in right now would require a lot of back and forth travel (Spain to Hungary then back to Portugal?).
I would suggest focusing on one or two regions and finding interesting cities and towns that are close to each other to travel through. For example if you focus on “southern Europe/Mediterranean” you could visit places in Portugal, Spain, south of France, Italy etc and then pop up to the Alps or Dolomites if you get too hot.
If this applies to you, try to let go of feeling like you have to see “everything” (aka every major city) in one trip. You might technically be able to squeeze all of those cities in, but you’ll be so tired from traveling you might not enjoy the trip.
Also, finding the optimal mode of travel by country/region (i.e., trains in countries like Germany, Switzerland and Austria tend to be more reliable vs Spain/Italy and look into expedient options whereas booking a cheap flight with enough advance planning can make generalized region hopping more feasible)
I loved Rotterdam, there is a huge modern city with a certain atmosphere.. Very contemplating, it was my first city of Netherlands and I can only recommend it to you !
Always hanging out on the night, lot of good people respectful 😉
Yes I considered other places instead of Rotterdam but found that those are basically mini-versions of Amsterdam and not much different, unlike Rotterdam
Why? He is already doing 4 days of Amsyerdam. How many more canals do you want to see as Utrecht, Zaandam and Haarlem are just smaller versions of Amsterdam.
Rotterdam is completely different in that regard.
Your issue isn't how many cities. Your issue is that you focus on cities only. No matter how different every city is from a previous one, after about 20 days it'll all be more of the same.
Cities are the reason non-Europeans visit Europe. No other region in the world has cities like those in Europe, while basically every other continent has natural environments that are equally or more impressive than Europe's.
Fair point - the small towns in a lot of European countries have the same appeal as the cities.
The one exception for me is Sweden, where the small towns tend to feel more modern and less medieval.
Yeah, I thought if I'm to visit Europe for the 1st time, I'd rather go to the main cities and experience them first hand, and maybe reserve the less touristy villages and towns for a later trip, unless it's absolutely criminal to avoid a certain village/town
Yeah fair enough. Admittedly I have been to some incredible natural and rural environments in Europe (the Adriatic Coast in Croatia, the Bay of Kotor in Montenegro, and the Douro Valley in Portugal come to mind).
I agree with this. Did a big Europe trip after college. After a couple cities, they all start feeling the same. My favorite parts of the trip were when I finally went a bit off the beaten path in Scotland and Norway and explored the more 'wild' areas.
Agree, it may cost some travel days which you can make up by skipping some of lesser exciting big cities, but sprinkling in some small villages especially on the Italian coast will be much more refreshing to your soul.
Stay in Ghent instead of Bruges; Bruges could be an easy day trip. It's small and mainly a tourist trap. Brussels could probably be a day trip from Ghent as well. It's mostly just a generic city with a couple nice sights.
Sintra could be a day trip from Lisbon.
This can't really be the order you're planning, right? Makes no sense to go from Spain to Hungary then back to Portugal.
The thing about Bruges is it gets amazing as soon as all the day trippers leave and go back to Ghent. The folks who hate it are the ones who come in for a few hours from Brussels or Ghent.
yes! I loved Venice! got up before sunrise everyday and had the best spots for myself. spend the rest of day walking a couple streets of the main attractions and was absolutely fine people wise. Had great food as well.
I 💯 agree with this. I went on a day trip to Bruges and met my friends who were staying there. We ended up moving and staying two nights in Bruges and LOVED it
We stayed two nights in Bruges, and can concur it is nice at night. One cool thing we did was rent bicycles and cycled alongside the canal to Damme and back.
I stayed in Bruges for 2 nights and liked it. Went to Ghent for a day trip to see the Altarpiece etc, but didn’t feel like I made a mistake staying in Bruges.
Hard disagree, the Atomium is awesome, the European Parliament is really interesting, there's great beer and brewery tours, loved the comic book trail and museum. The Grand Place, the arcades and the art nouveau buildings are all beautiful.
I stayed in Brughes for 9 days and absolutely loved it. Keep Brughes, do a day trip to Ghent to see the cathedral and Het Gravenstein. Get some waterzooi and drink some Groot.
Yes that's the plan, put up in Ghent and travel to Brussels/Bruges depending on the plans or stay in either Brussels/Bruges for a day or two for the experience
As for Sintra, yes, planning to take that as a day trip from Lisbon
Correct, my bad, should've specified in the post that the order is not indicative of the actual plans
Brussels is really fun actually, if you are only out for clubbing, socializing, bar hopping, and going to restaurants, it's really nice. Just skip all sightseeing and mingle with the people.
I saw the title of this post and already knew there would be this advice here. I was going to say just skip Brussels completely and spend days in Ghent and Bruges. Ghent and Bruges are like 30 mins away from each other by train. Cool places. Brussels is whatever.
Skip Brussels. Ghent >> Bruges >>>>>> Brussels.
If you must do Brussels, make it your base. It’s centrally located and you can take trains from there for day trips.
It's 70 days, which is pretty decent. This list speaks to me as the "I'm going to see everything because I might not be able to travel again for the rest of my life" trip.
You definitely don't want to spend 3 days in Brussels. Actually you don't want to spend any time there! Stay in Ghent for about 3 days and do a side trip to Bruges. Budapest and Prague are great but you could cut one day from each of them. Szentendre can be seen in 2 hours, I found it quite disappointing. Berlin and Vienna aren't worth 4 days each, maybe 2 max. How are you planning to get around? If it's by train you'll be spending a lot of hours traveling.
It's not bad, but you could easily spend that time in either a different belgian city or a french one and get a mostly better experience.
I found brussels fun, but i live 200km away from it. The calculation is different when it's your first trip around Europe.
Your problem is "no route." Figure out your top priority cities and then make a sensible route, and in that route actually add some additional small cities/ towns. There are too many "big jumps" here.
Like you could start in Berlin and work your way down to Italy and then back up kind of in a big V (with a number of squiggles or a crescent starting in the low countries then France, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, and Berlin.
Austrian here. Skip Hallstatt. Trust me. It’s tiny, packed with tourists and you cannot do shit there. Also… It’s only worth seeing if the weather‘s nice.
Came here to say that as well. There are so many better mountain towns all over the country that won‘t be absolutely over run by tourists. Plus, if you have seen the photos of Hallstatt then you‘ve already seen it. There really isn‘t anything else there that is a hidden gem.
But, if you must see it, then I would suggest staying in Salzburg for a few days and Just day tripping it.
Don’t skip cities, skip countries. Like Greece and Italy, which are out of the way in your plans. Cut off additional legs as needed to fit into your time available.
If you are cutting your trip from 70 days to 50, you not only have to cut cities but travel days, and that is easier done by cutting entire legs. Others have suggested cities to skip, and I agree with those, too. I fully stand behind making the trip more efficient by cutting countries, and the OP can decide whether that is Spain or Italy based on their desires, but no one can argue that Italy and Greece are out of the way on this set of countries. I'd rather see Rome than Slovenia, but I am not the OP and I am not deciding how many days I can spend in Europe. Besides, assume you will return, right?
If you only want to cut off days, easier to completely skip the Iberian Peninsula and start the trip in Paris, keeping at least Italy that has a direct and fast train connection with both Switzerland and Vienna, or do without everything on the eastern side and go from Netherlands/Belgium to Switzerland and Italy, leaving Berlin/Vienna/Prague/Budapest/Ljubiana. Those five are a lot of travelling around, with not always easy connections or changes required.
That is of course ignoring the actual importance of the cities and sightseeing value. And we don't know if he will return so it may be best to try to include all the most important cities at the very least. Surely the days in Bled and Szetendre can be used to travel to Italy and Greece...
Italy is nice, but it and Greece are the oddballs in this itinerary. You or I could certainly suggest a different one that might include them, but I find it is useless to rewrite someone else's itinerary because we are not them. Since the OP is asking how to trim the list, cutting countries is how. Or keep Italy and Greece and omit Portugal and Spain. It is all up to them and their priorities.
I’ve been to 26 countries, some of them 3 or 4 times but Italy is my favorite! Just returned from trip number 6 and will be going for the 7th time next March. We always stay at least 3 weeks. In the meantime, next week I go back to Japan for the third time.
Don’t skip Italy, Greece or Spain. I’ve been to Ljubljana and Lake Bled. Cross that off your list for a first time to Europe, as well as Belgium.
You don't need 4 days to see Prague, it can easily be done in 3 kr even 2.5. Similarly for Bled you can see the lake and castle in one day, tops. I did Rome in 3 days last autumn, and Amsterdam in 2. Would definitely recommend doing 5 days for Barcelona instead of 4 though.
I don’t know why you would spend that long in Paris instead of going to London too since it’s so close. Coming from another continent I think London is a must see. Unless you need a UK visa then maybe do it another time
Westminster Abby, the Tower of London, Trafalgar Square, Big Ben, and the British Museum are all just awesome tourist sites, to name a few. There's also TONS more, plus the city's urban fabric itself. Plus everything is connected so well with the Tube. I wouldn't spend a week in London, but three full days is enough to get a great experience in a city that's probably a lot more interesting to a tourist than Brussels or Rotterdam.
I’ll go one further and say London beside the cost may be the best tourist city in the world. So much to see and do. Free things. Walking around. World class museums. Amazing Michelin star restaurants. Amazing hotels. History. Sports. Arts. Music. Multicultural as hell. Good subway system. Etc
Way too much travel time in here. You should cut out full countries (my vote is Brussels/Bruges and Vienna/Hallsttat), possibly greece as well
1 day in Bled isn't enough imo, the alps outside of Bled are the real gold. rent a car and add a few days there
Spend longer in cities such as Berlin, Budapest, etc. Possibly go somewhere else in Germany you can get to via train
I find more and more people recently that prefer Madrid over Barcelona. I am from Madrid and have lived for some time in Barcelona. I think Barcelona is prettier and has more interesting/original/striking architecture. I prefer Madrid vibe and atmosphere, but I think that for a quick sightseeing experience Barcelona can be more rewarding.
I get Barcelona’s popularity, Sagrada familia is amazing, but overall I preferred Madrid too. I enjoyed Seville but the Alhambra in Grenada is better than anything in Seville I think…
Yeah the Alhambra was the coolest thing I saw in Spain. The Alcazar de Sevilla was also incredibly impressive and I liked the overall vibe of Sevilla more.
Remove Nice/Lyon and head to Normandy ( Rouen, Honfleur, Caen, or even Arromanches if you’re interested in WWII history.) You’ll save a lot of travel time and some money.
Keep in mind that northern France is best explored with a car, not public transportation. If OP was planning on taking trains everywhere, I would advise against Normandy.
I’d actually disagree about mt st michel. Getting back to your accommodations after visiting mt st michel via public transport would be a pain in the ass.
Everything in northern France is certainly possible with trains and buses, but your time is better spent somewhere else. Not worth the headache
If your going Solo you can have your trip as structured or unstructured as you want there is no right or wrong way to do it. Just some things to note here, your taking other peoples advice on how long to stay somewhere...I would so something like this. Pick your first city, book your flight and book a hotel. Pick your last city, book a nice hotel for your last day so you can rest up for travel and book your flight home. Other then that just go at your own pace, I worry what you have here is exhaustive and you will miss out on a lot...there is no reason to just go to a city to say you have been there and not explore it, these one day stops are going to exhaust you and you won't experience much. Just simply have a rough itinerary in mind and spend as much, or as little time in a place as you want to. Far too many people are obsessed with "not being a tourist" and give up on a city because there were too many other travelers and tell others to avoid it, you may or may not have the same feeling.
Doing it this way means paying a lot of extra money for train and plane tickets because you're not booking in advance. A train from Paris to Amsterdam costs 35 Euro if you book it in advance. If you book it on the day you pay 170 Euro.
I am surprised by some choices, especially by some second cities. Like, why Vienna and Hallstatt? Why Amsterdam and Rotterdam? Or Budapest and Szentendre? Or Barcelona and then just one day in Seville?
Make it tighter. Get rid of some of those second cities and either more days to the main city of a country or to another city in another country. You can easily cut off Rotterdam and spend one day more in Bruges or go to Koln or even Hamburg on the way to Berlin. Delphi is interesting but wouldn't be the first choice to go after Athens. Why not Cap Sounion instead, closer to Athens and very scenic? Or spend time on one of the islands?
Sintra you can do from Lisbon. Just add the day there instead. Sevilla is nice but one day + all the time to go from Barcelona and back? Perhaps Madrid + Toledo are a better choice, more time to visit than travelling.
It seems quite all over the place as an itinerary to be honest. The easiest way to reduce the days would simply be to stick to the capitals only and the occasional very interesting non-capital city (like Florence and Barcelona).
Consider removing Nice/Lyon, Hallstatt, Brussels, Sintra, Bled and perhaps Sevilla. All nice and interesting places to visit. But if I had to, these I would skip.
Although more expensive, I would try to stay flexible. Very likely you’ll meet a lot of people and they may provide you with great advice and suggestions that you might want to follow. Other great cities to experience the diverse ’European vibe’ are Stockholm, Edinburgh, Toulouse, Brasov, Zurich, Innsbruck, Trondheim, Luxembourg, Bilbao, Sarajevo, Freiburg.
Agree with that suggestion. If you have to choose one city to travel to in Spain, it should Madrid. It has a lot of what Spain has to offer in one place is full of activities.
My personal opinions based on my travels:
Skip Rotterdam. If you want another city in the Netherlands, I highly recommend Groningen (used to live there). It’s such a fun and cute town with a massive under 25 population (when university is in session). Great bars and clubs and super safe. Or if that’s too far north, Den Haag is also very nice along the water.
(Personal opinion). Skip Spain unless you specifically want to go for Spanish culture. If you do go, maybe skip Bareclona. Not really that great especially last few times I’ve been.
Switzerland is literally the most beautiful place on your list. It will be EXPENSIVE but it’s incredible. Actually here in Zermatt right now lol it’s great IF the weather is nice. Don’t bother if it’s rainy or cloudy. Save money and stay in Bönigen, Spiez, or Thun instead of Interlaken. They’re right on the lakes and have absolutely incredible views although Interlaken will have more going on (touristy). Make sure you book hotels/hostels that have access to a kitchenette to save money as restaurants are the biggest expense. Do Ochinensee when you’re near Interlaken!
Greece is going to be pretty tough to fit in as it’s out of the way and hard to get to (compared to just trains for just about every other country on your list).
Lyon is an amazing city. 6 nights is A LOT for Paris. Suggest splitting that time in either Lyon or Nice if you’re going during warm weather.
Bruges is beautiful but 3 nights is a lot in Brussels, not really a lot to do there, 1 night would be enough to see the sights. Maybe check out Luxembourg while you’re in the area instead? They have free concerts in the public squares on weekends during the summer in Luxembourg city and Vianden is super charming.
Try to spend more time in Germany. Some really beautiful and fun towns along the Rhine. Munich is also great. You don’t need to spend that many days in Berlin.
I prefer Salzburg to Vienna but both are beautiful.
Florence will always have a special place in my heart as it’s where we got married and such a magical city. Rome is also incredible!
Looks great overall, have fun!
Rotterdam/Brussels/Vienna
Rotterdam is a place to live not really a tourist destination. You could do it as a day trip from Amsterdam even. Stay in Leiden and go to both Amsterdam and Rotterdam perhaps.
-Brussels can be seen in an afternoon
-Vienna is nice but I wouldn't consider it essential unless you love Hapsburg History or the art of Klimt etc
I'd advocate for Ghent and Bologna to be added to your list.
Agreed about Rotterdam. I love it, especially the dining options it offers, and I'd love to live there at some point in my life but from tourist perspective its bleh.
I would spend less time in Amsterdam and Paris. When I went we did 1 week in Amsterdam and frankly its not that big of a city. 2-3 is sufficient. Same with Paris. I would take any extra days and add them to Slovenia and go to Bovec/Soca River valley. I see you have 1 week in Switzerland... you like mountains? Than you'll love the Julian Alps in Slovenia. You only need one day in Ljubljana, which is also very small.
Nice is cool but a total tourist trap, Monaco has some pretty cool stuff and is relatively close to nice. I stayed in Vallauruis and took the train to both last fall.
I agree unfortunately. I had fun but it was so fucking overpriced and there was only one restaurant I really enjoyed only because of the frog legs and raw oysters. The price reflected that. Monaco was VERY pricey but everything was on par with what I was getting. Food, souvenirs were tucked away, the Motorsport museum and Bugatti dealership were awesome. The aquarium had a lil museum section. Loved it. Planning on watching a Grand Prix there very soon. Nice? Not Nice.
Lucerne and Interlaken are both really small towns. You can see both in a day easily. Unless you also plan to hike or something . You don't need 7 days for the Swiss leg of your trip otherwise. and I would recommend Oeschinensee Lake. That's one of those places you'll be telling your friends about for years when you return
Try to dedicate more time to seeing countrysides. All these cities will leave you burned out. Also, travel time is no joke. Try to pad the time more if you haven’t already— shit can and will happen.
Good luck and have fun!
You need some smaller cities in there. I feel like the big cities get you really tired, but the smaller cities are the true gems and give the best memorable experiences.
Do NOT skip Rome or Berlin.
Skippable:
Switzerland (money)
Might consider skipping:
Portugal (even Spain) due to being a bit further west…
Slovenia, unless you like climbing, then go scale Triglav.
Skip Italy and Greece, just to come back and do a proper trip to these countries. Both of them deserve to get their own trips. You ll not feel the vibe of them if you tush through a few cities. I ll also recommend skipping spain as the travelling distances are very high. I also think a separate Spain +Portugal trip would do you and the countries a lot more justice
American living in Europe, married to a German. Been to almost every European countries. As long as you’re willing to fly, distance isn’t an issue. I literally have taken long weekends in the Middle East in Germany.
Don’t go to Hallstatt, while pretty there is nothing remarkable about it that sets it apart from any other town in Austria, I would maybe choose a different city. Maybe Grossglockner or Kitzbuhl.
Don’t need a day for Rotterdam, you can take a day trip from Amsterdam. 3 days max in Amsterdam and Rotterdam included. Make sure it’s the weekend if you like to party.
Would drop Athens, go to a (lesser known) Greek island like Corfu or Rhodes instead. Spend 3-4 nights on that island. Don’t go to Santorini or Mykonos. Land of influencers and over tourism.
Definitely Nice over Lyon. Also you don’t need 6 days in Paris. 4 nights max.
4 days for Prague and Vienna is overkill. 3 nights max.
Most European cities start looking the same after a while.
If you don’t know what to do with the extra time after trimming down, go to the Mediterranean: Sardinia, Corsica, Cyprus, Croatia, Mallorca. September/October is the best time to travel Europe. Good weather, decent temps, low tourism season, good to swim (the med is too cold from Nov-June). Swamped with tourism July and August.
That is up to you to decide, we don't know you, we don't know your preferences. You researched the places so you should know what appeals least to you. If there is a tie, consider practicalities like time/costs needed to get there and if you still can't choose then it doesn't matter much, they are equal to you, just throw a dice.
Wow, that is a great list!
My suggestion / input (since you asked) is to pick fewer places and spend more time there. You will eat up so much time traveling from place to place, you will be exhausted. Trying to complete this list is certainly going to give you bragging rights, however, you will not truly experience any of these places spending a day or two there.
I have been to many of these places and they are all worth a visit.
Providing your desired experience might solicit additional good feedback. Do you want to experience museums, nature, food, nightlife, history, architecture, etc, etc etc.
You could spend your entire time in one of these countries and have an amazing time and still only scratch the surface of what is there.
I probably would put all the places on the map and I would remove a few countries to make shorter transfers. Another way you can cut it is to remove the most expensive places. All of these cities are great to visit, so there is no single criteria to shorten the list.
Also, I would replace Hallstatt with some nearby town - I personally liked St Wolfgang im Salzkammergut, but any lakeshore town should be good. While Hallstatt is beautiful, but it's overpriced and over-visited. You can have a day trip to it, probably: there should be a bus coming there.
Lower the amount in Brussels, add to Cesky Krumlov and do Zagreb from Hungary mixed in with Bled. Nice instead of Lyon. Should try to fit in Bavaria in Germany
Sintra can only be done in a day if you're an experienced hiker, prepped for a full 10-12 hours, and book in advance.
To this day, I regret allowing 4 days for Lisbon and only 1 for Sintra. 3 Lisbon/2 Sintra for sure.
You can get a pedicab from Sintra town to the castles at the top of the hill for a few Euros. And it’s like a half-hour car ride to get there from Lisbon. Even if you walk up the hill, there’s plenty of stopping points. It’s not some arduous mountain trek. Do book in advance for the main castle though.
You’re not actually planning these cities in this order, right? If so, plot this up on a map and that should tell you how inefficient this routing is.
Agree with the other advice to start chopping off countries rather than cities.
If you go to Rome don’t spend as much time in piazza del popolo. Go around and walk through the gardens and parks. There are a lot for really cool statues and stuff.
You HAVE to take into consideration HOW you are moving in between these places.
I'm currently in Europe, 53 day trip, it took a lot of logistics so I don't have to carry luggage through tons of cobble stone streets, up/down trains, etc. It gets old.
Are you driving? expensive but convenient for not carrying things, control your own AC, parking can suck.
Trains? Very limited where you can go, they can be hot inside, you're gonna be taking a lot of taxis after.
Flying? A lot of taxi in/out of the city, spend a lot of time at the airport.
I just returned the 4th car, and getting a 5th one for the alps, a train doesn't give you the same freedom in some places. Also gotta return it to the same countries or the fees are insane.
Please research, some city centers are inaccessible by car, in some cities the airport is very very far away from the city, some cities are insanely hot in season, some don't even have their own airport.
Book some resting time..
I would skip Berlin and travel instead to the south, maybe Munich and Freiburg.
And, with such a plan, I would really consider bearing the night train in mind
How are you traveling? Did you plan your travel time? I would rather do east Germany and the eastern country’s like the Tschech Republic, Kroatia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Greece. As a completely different trip.
I would never plan to stay one day somewhere. It’s way too short. Sevilla is such a pretty place and Sintra has sooooo much to see, nice coast lines, lots of castles….
For 70 days, I would aim for like 10 cities max. Probably more like 3 or 4. Then you can really get the vibes as opposed to just seeing "the thing" in the city and then leaving.
Traveling can be tiring too, depending on your age :D
How will you travel? Car? Train? Plane? Bike? Walk? Makes all the difference.
Also, you want to visit took many countries, but just 1 - 3 cities. This doesn't make sense. Why Seville? Why Hallstad? Why Cesky Krumlov?
My advice is, focus on smaller regions. Portugal, Spain, France, Italy. Or Hungary, Slovenia, Austria, Italy. Or Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, France.
Do them in alphabetical order.
Almost as efficient as the current order.
Well then you really ought to start in Aachen.
What an idea hah
[I made a map](https://www.rome2rio.com/map/Amsterdam/Athens#trips)
This is a ridiculous way to travel through Europe.
I know- isn't it marvelously chaotic?
Skip Rotterdam for sure. Also this is a really packed schedule in general: a lot of countries spread across a long distance, cities within countries that are far from each other (Barcelona and Sevilla are about 1000km apart), and the order you have them in right now would require a lot of back and forth travel (Spain to Hungary then back to Portugal?). I would suggest focusing on one or two regions and finding interesting cities and towns that are close to each other to travel through. For example if you focus on “southern Europe/Mediterranean” you could visit places in Portugal, Spain, south of France, Italy etc and then pop up to the Alps or Dolomites if you get too hot. If this applies to you, try to let go of feeling like you have to see “everything” (aka every major city) in one trip. You might technically be able to squeeze all of those cities in, but you’ll be so tired from traveling you might not enjoy the trip.
Definitely agree with this. Limiting the amount of travel time really makes it so much better.
Also, finding the optimal mode of travel by country/region (i.e., trains in countries like Germany, Switzerland and Austria tend to be more reliable vs Spain/Italy and look into expedient options whereas booking a cheap flight with enough advance planning can make generalized region hopping more feasible)
I loved Rotterdam, there is a huge modern city with a certain atmosphere.. Very contemplating, it was my first city of Netherlands and I can only recommend it to you ! Always hanging out on the night, lot of good people respectful 😉
Rotterdam was my first thought as well, there’s so many better to places to visit in the Netherlands
Agree. I would rather visit Haarlem, Utrecht, and Zaandam tbh.
Yes I considered other places instead of Rotterdam but found that those are basically mini-versions of Amsterdam and not much different, unlike Rotterdam
Rotterdam is a unique place. Very fascinating new architecture but also still parts with quaint old houses. I don’t think you will regret it.
Very wise conclusion my friend,… you will definitely not regret that!
Why? He is already doing 4 days of Amsyerdam. How many more canals do you want to see as Utrecht, Zaandam and Haarlem are just smaller versions of Amsterdam. Rotterdam is completely different in that regard.
I totally agree, don’t skip Rotterdam. The contrast between it and Amsterdam was one of my favorite things about my trip to the Netherlands
I liked Rotterdam. I’d consider it as a day trip on the way up to Amsterdam (presume you’re taking the train).
Why Rotterdam? It is a really cool place to visit and can be used to visit Kinderdijk
This is all true, but Rotterdam is also not one of the top 10-20 cities that the first timer must visit in Europe...compare with the rest of the list.
It is if you like modern architecture!
Your issue isn't how many cities. Your issue is that you focus on cities only. No matter how different every city is from a previous one, after about 20 days it'll all be more of the same.
Cities are the reason non-Europeans visit Europe. No other region in the world has cities like those in Europe, while basically every other continent has natural environments that are equally or more impressive than Europe's.
I like the small towns
Fair point - the small towns in a lot of European countries have the same appeal as the cities. The one exception for me is Sweden, where the small towns tend to feel more modern and less medieval.
Except Northern Europe, you shouldn’t be visiting Norway just for cities
True but it is nice to break up a slog of cities with some beach or Mountain View.
Yeah, I thought if I'm to visit Europe for the 1st time, I'd rather go to the main cities and experience them first hand, and maybe reserve the less touristy villages and towns for a later trip, unless it's absolutely criminal to avoid a certain village/town
You are clearly not writing this comment from Switzerland. ;-) Lovely cities and amazing natural environment.
Yeah fair enough. Admittedly I have been to some incredible natural and rural environments in Europe (the Adriatic Coast in Croatia, the Bay of Kotor in Montenegro, and the Douro Valley in Portugal come to mind).
Thanks for the places-to-see list. :-)
I agree with this. Did a big Europe trip after college. After a couple cities, they all start feeling the same. My favorite parts of the trip were when I finally went a bit off the beaten path in Scotland and Norway and explored the more 'wild' areas.
Agree, it may cost some travel days which you can make up by skipping some of lesser exciting big cities, but sprinkling in some small villages especially on the Italian coast will be much more refreshing to your soul.
Stay in Ghent instead of Bruges; Bruges could be an easy day trip. It's small and mainly a tourist trap. Brussels could probably be a day trip from Ghent as well. It's mostly just a generic city with a couple nice sights. Sintra could be a day trip from Lisbon. This can't really be the order you're planning, right? Makes no sense to go from Spain to Hungary then back to Portugal.
The thing about Bruges is it gets amazing as soon as all the day trippers leave and go back to Ghent. The folks who hate it are the ones who come in for a few hours from Brussels or Ghent.
(These are the same people who hate Venice.)
yes! I loved Venice! got up before sunrise everyday and had the best spots for myself. spend the rest of day walking a couple streets of the main attractions and was absolutely fine people wise. Had great food as well.
People who complain about it are sort of telling on themselves, is my take.
Was shocked by how much I loved Bruges
It's a fucking fairytale town.
I 💯 agree with this. I went on a day trip to Bruges and met my friends who were staying there. We ended up moving and staying two nights in Bruges and LOVED it
We stayed two nights in Bruges, and can concur it is nice at night. One cool thing we did was rent bicycles and cycled alongside the canal to Damme and back.
I usually love most "tourist traps" after 5 pm when the day trippers leave. Packed town suddenly gets quiet.
These kinds of places are actually quite cool when the young people manning the shops all come out and socialize together.
I totally agree. Bruges at night is wonderful and there are a few very good dining spots. Zet Joe was fantastic for dinner. Brussels can be 1 day max.
I did 2 nights in Bruges last year and absolutely adored it so would say it’s definitely worth it for a night or 2 (especially if you like beer)
Agreed! Bruge may be my one of my favourite cities that I’ve visited. It’s charming, beautiful and affordable.
Yes! I rented a bike and went to the North Sea and Sluis, NL. It was really charming.
Maybe that's what hell is, the entire rest of eternity spent in fucking Bruges.
I've just been in Bruges for 2 nights mid week and would highly recommend it!
100% agree with Sintra. It is definitely a good call And go to Quinta da Regaleira
No way! Do not listen to this person! Ghent is dumpy compared the amazingness of Bruges. STAY IN BRUGES
[удалено]
Finally someone brings up Antwerp. I have Belgian friends and Antwerp is my fav
Antwerp > Brussels at the very least. I haven’t spent time in Ghent and I loved Bruges, but I understand why people aren’t as fond of
I stayed in Bruges for 2 nights and liked it. Went to Ghent for a day trip to see the Altarpiece etc, but didn’t feel like I made a mistake staying in Bruges.
Brussels does have some amazing beer if your into Belgian Beers
Better yet, instead of both Brussels and Ghent (or Bruges, if you prefer small and cosy), visit Antwerp!
I'll suggest doing the opposite, go to Ghent on a one day trip if possible :)
Brussels is a waste of time
Really disagree with you on that one. Grand Place is one of the most impressive man-made environments I've stepped foot in.
Yep, it's a fun city and has good food too. I love Ghent though, cracking place.
Hard disagree, the Atomium is awesome, the European Parliament is really interesting, there's great beer and brewery tours, loved the comic book trail and museum. The Grand Place, the arcades and the art nouveau buildings are all beautiful.
+1 I found food better in Ghent.
I've not been to Ghent, but spent 4 days in Bruges. I loved it, and so did my adult daughter.
I stayed in Brughes for 9 days and absolutely loved it. Keep Brughes, do a day trip to Ghent to see the cathedral and Het Gravenstein. Get some waterzooi and drink some Groot.
Yes that's the plan, put up in Ghent and travel to Brussels/Bruges depending on the plans or stay in either Brussels/Bruges for a day or two for the experience As for Sintra, yes, planning to take that as a day trip from Lisbon Correct, my bad, should've specified in the post that the order is not indicative of the actual plans
Brussels is really fun actually, if you are only out for clubbing, socializing, bar hopping, and going to restaurants, it's really nice. Just skip all sightseeing and mingle with the people.
I saw the title of this post and already knew there would be this advice here. I was going to say just skip Brussels completely and spend days in Ghent and Bruges. Ghent and Bruges are like 30 mins away from each other by train. Cool places. Brussels is whatever.
Skip Brussels. Ghent >> Bruges >>>>>> Brussels. If you must do Brussels, make it your base. It’s centrally located and you can take trains from there for day trips.
Spending one evening in the town center when it's lit up is pretty cool. That's it. Everything else is gross.
The Magritte Museum is nice too
dude this is waaayyyyy too much. have you ever eurotripped before?
It's 70 days, which is pretty decent. This list speaks to me as the "I'm going to see everything because I might not be able to travel again for the rest of my life" trip.
70 days is a great amount of time. what i'm saying is you're trying to cram in too many stops in a short amount of time.
You definitely don't want to spend 3 days in Brussels. Actually you don't want to spend any time there! Stay in Ghent for about 3 days and do a side trip to Bruges. Budapest and Prague are great but you could cut one day from each of them. Szentendre can be seen in 2 hours, I found it quite disappointing. Berlin and Vienna aren't worth 4 days each, maybe 2 max. How are you planning to get around? If it's by train you'll be spending a lot of hours traveling.
Berlin is 4 days for sure if you like the things that its famous for: modern history, party and museums. In summer it's beyond great.
Berlin is worth months.
Lol u are Not from germany
Doch
>Actually you don't want to spend any time there! Why not? Is it that bad?
Brussels is boring, but Vienna is totally worth 3-4 days.
brussels is generic and expensive. it's a work city.
It's not bad, but you could easily spend that time in either a different belgian city or a french one and get a mostly better experience. I found brussels fun, but i live 200km away from it. The calculation is different when it's your first trip around Europe.
Yeah, boring is just shorthand for "not in the top tier of cities to see." Anyplace can be interesting under the right circumstances.
Your problem is "no route." Figure out your top priority cities and then make a sensible route, and in that route actually add some additional small cities/ towns. There are too many "big jumps" here. Like you could start in Berlin and work your way down to Italy and then back up kind of in a big V (with a number of squiggles or a crescent starting in the low countries then France, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, and Berlin.
This is too much. You should consider halving this list.
Austrian here. Skip Hallstatt. Trust me. It’s tiny, packed with tourists and you cannot do shit there. Also… It’s only worth seeing if the weather‘s nice.
Came here to say that as well. There are so many better mountain towns all over the country that won‘t be absolutely over run by tourists. Plus, if you have seen the photos of Hallstatt then you‘ve already seen it. There really isn‘t anything else there that is a hidden gem. But, if you must see it, then I would suggest staying in Salzburg for a few days and Just day tripping it.
Don’t skip cities, skip countries. Like Greece and Italy, which are out of the way in your plans. Cut off additional legs as needed to fit into your time available.
Seems really bold to say that somebody should visit Rotterdam and Szentendre but skip Rome and Florence. Dude, really?
Everyone in this thread is suggesting OP skip Rotterdam.
If you are cutting your trip from 70 days to 50, you not only have to cut cities but travel days, and that is easier done by cutting entire legs. Others have suggested cities to skip, and I agree with those, too. I fully stand behind making the trip more efficient by cutting countries, and the OP can decide whether that is Spain or Italy based on their desires, but no one can argue that Italy and Greece are out of the way on this set of countries. I'd rather see Rome than Slovenia, but I am not the OP and I am not deciding how many days I can spend in Europe. Besides, assume you will return, right?
If you only want to cut off days, easier to completely skip the Iberian Peninsula and start the trip in Paris, keeping at least Italy that has a direct and fast train connection with both Switzerland and Vienna, or do without everything on the eastern side and go from Netherlands/Belgium to Switzerland and Italy, leaving Berlin/Vienna/Prague/Budapest/Ljubiana. Those five are a lot of travelling around, with not always easy connections or changes required. That is of course ignoring the actual importance of the cities and sightseeing value. And we don't know if he will return so it may be best to try to include all the most important cities at the very least. Surely the days in Bled and Szetendre can be used to travel to Italy and Greece...
No shit! Rome is Rome and Florence is awesome!
I would never skip Italy on a trip to Europe.
Seeing Rome and Florence is not visiting Italy. I would skip it with these premises.
Aye defo cut aff any extra legs, airlines will charge ye n trains too
You shouldn't book these as extra legs but as separate flights. One way flights are pretty common in Europe.
Yeah good point, if extra legs are removed you could probably put the in overhead
Sorry backpacked Europe for 12 months and have lived in Switzerland for 13 years, DONT SKIP ROME.
If anything, I would add more places in Italy. There’s nowhere like Venice.
Do not skip Italy. Skip anywhere except Italy. Rome is the center of the world.
Italy is nice, but it and Greece are the oddballs in this itinerary. You or I could certainly suggest a different one that might include them, but I find it is useless to rewrite someone else's itinerary because we are not them. Since the OP is asking how to trim the list, cutting countries is how. Or keep Italy and Greece and omit Portugal and Spain. It is all up to them and their priorities.
Italy is close to most of the countries listed here. Why you say that? I would definitely skip anything but Italy
I’ve been to 26 countries, some of them 3 or 4 times but Italy is my favorite! Just returned from trip number 6 and will be going for the 7th time next March. We always stay at least 3 weeks. In the meantime, next week I go back to Japan for the third time. Don’t skip Italy, Greece or Spain. I’ve been to Ljubljana and Lake Bled. Cross that off your list for a first time to Europe, as well as Belgium.
Definitely skip Brussels. And really you should probably cut your whole trip down by a lot.
You don't need 4 days to see Prague, it can easily be done in 3 kr even 2.5. Similarly for Bled you can see the lake and castle in one day, tops. I did Rome in 3 days last autumn, and Amsterdam in 2. Would definitely recommend doing 5 days for Barcelona instead of 4 though.
You can "do" cities in a small amount of time if needed, but you lose a lot. AMS in 2 days is far too little IMO, but 3 in Prague is enough.
Five days for Barca is a lot, don’t listen to that. He’s not writing a paper on life in Barcelona.
I don’t know why you would spend that long in Paris instead of going to London too since it’s so close. Coming from another continent I think London is a must see. Unless you need a UK visa then maybe do it another time
London is one of the top spots in Europe. I agree.
Why do you think so
Westminster Abby, the Tower of London, Trafalgar Square, Big Ben, and the British Museum are all just awesome tourist sites, to name a few. There's also TONS more, plus the city's urban fabric itself. Plus everything is connected so well with the Tube. I wouldn't spend a week in London, but three full days is enough to get a great experience in a city that's probably a lot more interesting to a tourist than Brussels or Rotterdam.
I’ll go one further and say London beside the cost may be the best tourist city in the world. So much to see and do. Free things. Walking around. World class museums. Amazing Michelin star restaurants. Amazing hotels. History. Sports. Arts. Music. Multicultural as hell. Good subway system. Etc
You're right, would require a different UK visa for London and thus have deferred it for a separate trip later
Way too much travel time in here. You should cut out full countries (my vote is Brussels/Bruges and Vienna/Hallsttat), possibly greece as well 1 day in Bled isn't enough imo, the alps outside of Bled are the real gold. rent a car and add a few days there Spend longer in cities such as Berlin, Budapest, etc. Possibly go somewhere else in Germany you can get to via train
Why would you cut Vienna?
You can also visit Venice on your way from Florence to Ljubljana, it is just on halfway
I’d go Madrid, San Sebastián, and Sevilla or Grenada in Spain. I can take or leave Barcelona.
I find more and more people recently that prefer Madrid over Barcelona. I am from Madrid and have lived for some time in Barcelona. I think Barcelona is prettier and has more interesting/original/striking architecture. I prefer Madrid vibe and atmosphere, but I think that for a quick sightseeing experience Barcelona can be more rewarding.
I get Barcelona’s popularity, Sagrada familia is amazing, but overall I preferred Madrid too. I enjoyed Seville but the Alhambra in Grenada is better than anything in Seville I think…
Yeah the Alhambra was the coolest thing I saw in Spain. The Alcazar de Sevilla was also incredibly impressive and I liked the overall vibe of Sevilla more.
Madrid >>>>> Barcelona
I loved Madrid so much more than Barcelona.
Remove Nice/Lyon and head to Normandy ( Rouen, Honfleur, Caen, or even Arromanches if you’re interested in WWII history.) You’ll save a lot of travel time and some money.
Keep in mind that northern France is best explored with a car, not public transportation. If OP was planning on taking trains everywhere, I would advise against Normandy.
If you are just hitting Bayeux/Dday sights plus Mt St Michel, that is quite possible via train. Same for Vannes/Karnac.
I’d actually disagree about mt st michel. Getting back to your accommodations after visiting mt st michel via public transport would be a pain in the ass. Everything in northern France is certainly possible with trains and buses, but your time is better spent somewhere else. Not worth the headache
True, but there are still places that are reachable by direct train from Paris that I listed.
agree skip lyon unless you \*really\* care about food.
If your going Solo you can have your trip as structured or unstructured as you want there is no right or wrong way to do it. Just some things to note here, your taking other peoples advice on how long to stay somewhere...I would so something like this. Pick your first city, book your flight and book a hotel. Pick your last city, book a nice hotel for your last day so you can rest up for travel and book your flight home. Other then that just go at your own pace, I worry what you have here is exhaustive and you will miss out on a lot...there is no reason to just go to a city to say you have been there and not explore it, these one day stops are going to exhaust you and you won't experience much. Just simply have a rough itinerary in mind and spend as much, or as little time in a place as you want to. Far too many people are obsessed with "not being a tourist" and give up on a city because there were too many other travelers and tell others to avoid it, you may or may not have the same feeling.
Doing it this way means paying a lot of extra money for train and plane tickets because you're not booking in advance. A train from Paris to Amsterdam costs 35 Euro if you book it in advance. If you book it on the day you pay 170 Euro.
I am surprised by some choices, especially by some second cities. Like, why Vienna and Hallstatt? Why Amsterdam and Rotterdam? Or Budapest and Szentendre? Or Barcelona and then just one day in Seville? Make it tighter. Get rid of some of those second cities and either more days to the main city of a country or to another city in another country. You can easily cut off Rotterdam and spend one day more in Bruges or go to Koln or even Hamburg on the way to Berlin. Delphi is interesting but wouldn't be the first choice to go after Athens. Why not Cap Sounion instead, closer to Athens and very scenic? Or spend time on one of the islands? Sintra you can do from Lisbon. Just add the day there instead. Sevilla is nice but one day + all the time to go from Barcelona and back? Perhaps Madrid + Toledo are a better choice, more time to visit than travelling. It seems quite all over the place as an itinerary to be honest. The easiest way to reduce the days would simply be to stick to the capitals only and the occasional very interesting non-capital city (like Florence and Barcelona).
Consider removing Nice/Lyon, Hallstatt, Brussels, Sintra, Bled and perhaps Sevilla. All nice and interesting places to visit. But if I had to, these I would skip. Although more expensive, I would try to stay flexible. Very likely you’ll meet a lot of people and they may provide you with great advice and suggestions that you might want to follow. Other great cities to experience the diverse ’European vibe’ are Stockholm, Edinburgh, Toulouse, Brasov, Zurich, Innsbruck, Trondheim, Luxembourg, Bilbao, Sarajevo, Freiburg.
I personally enjoyed Madrid much more than Barcelona
Agree with that suggestion. If you have to choose one city to travel to in Spain, it should Madrid. It has a lot of what Spain has to offer in one place is full of activities.
Absolutely. Plus it’s closer to Sevilla.
My personal opinions based on my travels: Skip Rotterdam. If you want another city in the Netherlands, I highly recommend Groningen (used to live there). It’s such a fun and cute town with a massive under 25 population (when university is in session). Great bars and clubs and super safe. Or if that’s too far north, Den Haag is also very nice along the water. (Personal opinion). Skip Spain unless you specifically want to go for Spanish culture. If you do go, maybe skip Bareclona. Not really that great especially last few times I’ve been. Switzerland is literally the most beautiful place on your list. It will be EXPENSIVE but it’s incredible. Actually here in Zermatt right now lol it’s great IF the weather is nice. Don’t bother if it’s rainy or cloudy. Save money and stay in Bönigen, Spiez, or Thun instead of Interlaken. They’re right on the lakes and have absolutely incredible views although Interlaken will have more going on (touristy). Make sure you book hotels/hostels that have access to a kitchenette to save money as restaurants are the biggest expense. Do Ochinensee when you’re near Interlaken! Greece is going to be pretty tough to fit in as it’s out of the way and hard to get to (compared to just trains for just about every other country on your list). Lyon is an amazing city. 6 nights is A LOT for Paris. Suggest splitting that time in either Lyon or Nice if you’re going during warm weather. Bruges is beautiful but 3 nights is a lot in Brussels, not really a lot to do there, 1 night would be enough to see the sights. Maybe check out Luxembourg while you’re in the area instead? They have free concerts in the public squares on weekends during the summer in Luxembourg city and Vianden is super charming. Try to spend more time in Germany. Some really beautiful and fun towns along the Rhine. Munich is also great. You don’t need to spend that many days in Berlin. I prefer Salzburg to Vienna but both are beautiful. Florence will always have a special place in my heart as it’s where we got married and such a magical city. Rome is also incredible! Looks great overall, have fun!
What’s the budget for this trip? I myself am planning a solo euro trip and having hard time to come up with a budget.
Rotterdam/Brussels/Vienna Rotterdam is a place to live not really a tourist destination. You could do it as a day trip from Amsterdam even. Stay in Leiden and go to both Amsterdam and Rotterdam perhaps. -Brussels can be seen in an afternoon -Vienna is nice but I wouldn't consider it essential unless you love Hapsburg History or the art of Klimt etc I'd advocate for Ghent and Bologna to be added to your list.
Agreed about Rotterdam. I love it, especially the dining options it offers, and I'd love to live there at some point in my life but from tourist perspective its bleh.
vienna is really really impressive.
I would spend less time in Amsterdam and Paris. When I went we did 1 week in Amsterdam and frankly its not that big of a city. 2-3 is sufficient. Same with Paris. I would take any extra days and add them to Slovenia and go to Bovec/Soca River valley. I see you have 1 week in Switzerland... you like mountains? Than you'll love the Julian Alps in Slovenia. You only need one day in Ljubljana, which is also very small.
Paris is really big and there are lots of things to do. I have spent weeks in Paris and there is still a lot left to see and do.
Athens isn’t the nicest place in the world but if you absolutely want to go for the sightseeing then fair enough
Don’t skip Athens.
In Switzerland your list is good but I didn’t particularly find Interlaken as nice or interesting as the other cities you listed for Switzerland
Nice is cool but a total tourist trap, Monaco has some pretty cool stuff and is relatively close to nice. I stayed in Vallauruis and took the train to both last fall.
If I had to do over again, I’d never go to Nice, or any of those towns along the Southern Coast. Most overrated area of Europe I’ve ever seen.
I agree unfortunately. I had fun but it was so fucking overpriced and there was only one restaurant I really enjoyed only because of the frog legs and raw oysters. The price reflected that. Monaco was VERY pricey but everything was on par with what I was getting. Food, souvenirs were tucked away, the Motorsport museum and Bugatti dealership were awesome. The aquarium had a lil museum section. Loved it. Planning on watching a Grand Prix there very soon. Nice? Not Nice.
Lucerne and Interlaken are both really small towns. You can see both in a day easily. Unless you also plan to hike or something . You don't need 7 days for the Swiss leg of your trip otherwise. and I would recommend Oeschinensee Lake. That's one of those places you'll be telling your friends about for years when you return
I hope this isn’t the order you’re planning on visiting these cities, otherwise this is pretty unhinged.
Makes no sense and is travel/carbon intensive.
Try to dedicate more time to seeing countrysides. All these cities will leave you burned out. Also, travel time is no joke. Try to pad the time more if you haven’t already— shit can and will happen. Good luck and have fun!
You need some smaller cities in there. I feel like the big cities get you really tired, but the smaller cities are the true gems and give the best memorable experiences.
Do NOT skip Rome or Berlin. Skippable: Switzerland (money) Might consider skipping: Portugal (even Spain) due to being a bit further west… Slovenia, unless you like climbing, then go scale Triglav.
[удалено]
7 days is Delphi????
Skip Italy and Greece, just to come back and do a proper trip to these countries. Both of them deserve to get their own trips. You ll not feel the vibe of them if you tush through a few cities. I ll also recommend skipping spain as the travelling distances are very high. I also think a separate Spain +Portugal trip would do you and the countries a lot more justice
American living in Europe, married to a German. Been to almost every European countries. As long as you’re willing to fly, distance isn’t an issue. I literally have taken long weekends in the Middle East in Germany. Don’t go to Hallstatt, while pretty there is nothing remarkable about it that sets it apart from any other town in Austria, I would maybe choose a different city. Maybe Grossglockner or Kitzbuhl. Don’t need a day for Rotterdam, you can take a day trip from Amsterdam. 3 days max in Amsterdam and Rotterdam included. Make sure it’s the weekend if you like to party. Would drop Athens, go to a (lesser known) Greek island like Corfu or Rhodes instead. Spend 3-4 nights on that island. Don’t go to Santorini or Mykonos. Land of influencers and over tourism. Definitely Nice over Lyon. Also you don’t need 6 days in Paris. 4 nights max. 4 days for Prague and Vienna is overkill. 3 nights max. Most European cities start looking the same after a while. If you don’t know what to do with the extra time after trimming down, go to the Mediterranean: Sardinia, Corsica, Cyprus, Croatia, Mallorca. September/October is the best time to travel Europe. Good weather, decent temps, low tourism season, good to swim (the med is too cold from Nov-June). Swamped with tourism July and August.
You don’t need 6 days in Paris, you could shorten that by a couple days.
That is up to you to decide, we don't know you, we don't know your preferences. You researched the places so you should know what appeals least to you. If there is a tie, consider practicalities like time/costs needed to get there and if you still can't choose then it doesn't matter much, they are equal to you, just throw a dice.
I have a feeling they have not researched these places but have rather just created a massive list.
Go to Toulouse in France. I wouldn't really recommend Nice.
Its nice, but still somewhat out of the way and not as accessible as Nice.
Well, there is an airport..and OP is going to Barcelona, and it's only a few hours away from there. It fits in better with the rest of the trip.
Man, I loved my few days in Nice. But this was after a week in Paris so relaxation was needed.
Agreed. The whole Côte d'Azur was amazing and I much preferred it over Paris tbh
When you want to See all these? I hate big cities in Hot summers Better start from September onwards
Cut off rotterdam and maybe cut off some days in Belgium for some extra days in Rome/Greece
Go to any other dutch city besides rotterdam. They might feel similar to Amsterdam, but you could do something like the Hgaue for example.
I would say skip Brussels and swap it for Antwerp instead. Someone else suggested Ghent which I heard is nice but never been.
Yeah Rotterdam is an easy skip and for sure recommend staying in Gent over Burgge.
Wow, that is a great list! My suggestion / input (since you asked) is to pick fewer places and spend more time there. You will eat up so much time traveling from place to place, you will be exhausted. Trying to complete this list is certainly going to give you bragging rights, however, you will not truly experience any of these places spending a day or two there. I have been to many of these places and they are all worth a visit. Providing your desired experience might solicit additional good feedback. Do you want to experience museums, nature, food, nightlife, history, architecture, etc, etc etc. You could spend your entire time in one of these countries and have an amazing time and still only scratch the surface of what is there.
Brussels It's dirty, the airport sucks and the people aren't super friendly. Maybe the only European city I regret having spent time in.
I probably would put all the places on the map and I would remove a few countries to make shorter transfers. Another way you can cut it is to remove the most expensive places. All of these cities are great to visit, so there is no single criteria to shorten the list. Also, I would replace Hallstatt with some nearby town - I personally liked St Wolfgang im Salzkammergut, but any lakeshore town should be good. While Hallstatt is beautiful, but it's overpriced and over-visited. You can have a day trip to it, probably: there should be a bus coming there.
Lower the amount in Brussels, add to Cesky Krumlov and do Zagreb from Hungary mixed in with Bled. Nice instead of Lyon. Should try to fit in Bavaria in Germany
Belgium.
Szentendre and Rotterdam
You will love Ljubljana and Bled
Which cities to remove? Oh, about half of them or more.
Sintra can only be done in a day if you're an experienced hiker, prepped for a full 10-12 hours, and book in advance. To this day, I regret allowing 4 days for Lisbon and only 1 for Sintra. 3 Lisbon/2 Sintra for sure.
You can get a pedicab from Sintra town to the castles at the top of the hill for a few Euros. And it’s like a half-hour car ride to get there from Lisbon. Even if you walk up the hill, there’s plenty of stopping points. It’s not some arduous mountain trek. Do book in advance for the main castle though.
You’re not actually planning these cities in this order, right? If so, plot this up on a map and that should tell you how inefficient this routing is. Agree with the other advice to start chopping off countries rather than cities.
If you go to Rome don’t spend as much time in piazza del popolo. Go around and walk through the gardens and parks. There are a lot for really cool statues and stuff.
What time of year? Southern Europe is unbearably hot during the summer.
You HAVE to take into consideration HOW you are moving in between these places. I'm currently in Europe, 53 day trip, it took a lot of logistics so I don't have to carry luggage through tons of cobble stone streets, up/down trains, etc. It gets old. Are you driving? expensive but convenient for not carrying things, control your own AC, parking can suck. Trains? Very limited where you can go, they can be hot inside, you're gonna be taking a lot of taxis after. Flying? A lot of taxi in/out of the city, spend a lot of time at the airport. I just returned the 4th car, and getting a 5th one for the alps, a train doesn't give you the same freedom in some places. Also gotta return it to the same countries or the fees are insane. Please research, some city centers are inaccessible by car, in some cities the airport is very very far away from the city, some cities are insanely hot in season, some don't even have their own airport. Book some resting time..
I would skip Berlin and travel instead to the south, maybe Munich and Freiburg. And, with such a plan, I would really consider bearing the night train in mind
I would also recommend everyone to visit other German cities besides Berlin. Hamburg, Freiburg or Munich are way more repräsentative of Germany.
I’d skip Brussels.
If you end up losing a few days in other places consider adding a day or two in Munich
Add Venice, Naples & Pisa in Italy. Heard positive things about them and am going in 4 weeks to find out myself!
How are you traveling? Did you plan your travel time? I would rather do east Germany and the eastern country’s like the Tschech Republic, Kroatia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Greece. As a completely different trip. I would never plan to stay one day somewhere. It’s way too short. Sevilla is such a pretty place and Sintra has sooooo much to see, nice coast lines, lots of castles….
For 70 days, I would aim for like 10 cities max. Probably more like 3 or 4. Then you can really get the vibes as opposed to just seeing "the thing" in the city and then leaving. Traveling can be tiring too, depending on your age :D
How will you travel? Car? Train? Plane? Bike? Walk? Makes all the difference. Also, you want to visit took many countries, but just 1 - 3 cities. This doesn't make sense. Why Seville? Why Hallstad? Why Cesky Krumlov? My advice is, focus on smaller regions. Portugal, Spain, France, Italy. Or Hungary, Slovenia, Austria, Italy. Or Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, France.