Both are great, but I'm very partial to Budapest
by sprack (2019-08-23 15:09:16)
Edited on 2019-08-23 15:51:57

In reply to: Vienna or Budapest?  posted by irishsundevil

Post Reply Return to Back Room

It's a more interesting city I think because of the river (and Vienna is a beautiful city). Vienna's on the Danube, too, but it's not central to the city because central Vienna is within the old city walls that were not on the river. In contrast, the river is everything to Budapest, as central to it as the Seine is to Paris - and the riverfront especially on the Pest side will remind you of Paris.

It is really two cities, as they once were, both beautiful - hilly Buda and flat Pest.

Among the other many attractions to me -

The unique Hungarian culture and language. And Hungarians are friendly!

The resurrection of the city after 40 years of Communism preceded by years of Fascism.

And it's cheap. The best meal my wife and I had there cost us the equivalent of 25 bucks.

We were there 4 days (one day outside of Budapest) and still left things to see on the table. We never got to Gellért Hill in Buda, for example. Never used the famous baths either. Didn't get to the "Ruin Quarter". Never walked down Váci Utca to the Central Market Hall.

I love Budapest. We gotta go back.

Budapest is unique. Vienna has a lot of things you can see elsewhere. Not that it isn't a great thing to see, but if you've been to Versailles, you've kind of been to Schönbrunn, as on example (Marie Antoinette even lived in both). What Vienna does have over just about anywhere is a brilliant classical music scene, as you might expect.

I do love Vienna, so get to both (and compare this similarities in Pest especially to Vienna, such as the street layout and the coffee houses that were of course copied from Vienna under the Dual Monarchy), but Budapest first.

Replies: