Which Itinerary to choose

Looking to cruise the Baltic July 2015. Princess on the Regal or HAL on the Eurodam. I have cruised both these lines in the past. Itinerary is very similar except HAL allows for 2 nights in Stockholm where Princess gives

you 1 night with additional day in Oslo, Norway. Any thoughts on these two

choices. Thanks.

I really enjoyed Oslo, far more than Stockholm though that may be a minority view. As it's not either or, I'd go for the itinerary which allows you to visit both, particularly if you're not going to be visiting the Baltics again any time soon.

I think I would also choose the cruise which visits both Stockholm and Oslo. We did a Baltic cruise last September and had an overnight in Stockholm, which we thoroughly enjoyed and it gave us plenty of time to look a round.

I have never been to Oslo, so can't compare.

I did the Baltic on Royal Princess. loved the trip! basically you are saying should you do 2 days in Stockholm or 1 day in Stockholm and 1 day in Oslo? Clearly take 1 day in each place. Oslo is not a throw away port and is well worth going to. one of the coolest things on our entire trip was the Viegland Sculpture Park in Oslo. Also seeing "The Scream" was pretty cool. And what about the Viking Ship Museum? I don't think this is a difficult decision at all.

Looking to cruise the Baltic July 2015. Princess on the Regal or HAL on the Eurodam. I have cruised both these lines in the past. Itinerary is very similar except HAL allows for 2 nights in Stockholm where Princess gives you 1 night with additional day in Oslo, Norway. Any thoughts on these two choices. Thanks.

Not an easy or simple choice. Both, however, are winners. Neither is a loser. In 2008, we had a full day in Oslo and like it very much. BUT, Oslo is not as old and historic as Copenhagen and Stockholm. Our cruise finished in Stockholm and we had two full days there. Worked very well for us. Below are some of my notes that I have shared previously with others. Plus, some of my visuals. Hope this helps a little.

How major is your interest in arts??

People will sometimes ask how Oslo compares to Stockholm and Copenhagen. Much of the difference is about the contrast of Oslo's more contemporary great art/design . . . versus . . . the deeper depth of history/design and royal background associated with both Copenhagen and Stockholm. Both of these capitals of Sweden and Denmark have had much longer recent histories of power and wealth, while Oslo is "newer" in many ways.

Two centuries of Viking raids/advances/power went to southern and western areas. But that tapered off following the adoption of Christianity in AD 994. At one point, Norway expanded its control to parts of Britain, Ireland, Iceland and Greenland. Per Wikipedia, Norwegian power peaked in 1265, but competition from the Hanseatic League and the spread of the "Black Death" weakened the country. In 1380, Norway was absorbed into a union with Denmark that lasted more than four centuries. In 1814, Norwegians resisted the cession of their country to Sweden and adopted a new constitution. Sweden went to war with Norway but agreed to let Norway keep its constitution in return for accepting the union under a Swedish king. Later Norway demanded independence, which it gained in a referendum in 1905. that brought back a King for this country. Norway remained neutral in World War I. Despite its declaration of neutrality in World War II, Norway was occupied for five years by forces of Germany. In 1949, it abandoned neutrality becoming a founding member of NATO. Discovery of oil in adjacent waters in the late 1960's boosted Norway's economic fortunes. This "weave of history" gives a better perspective for why and how things evolved from the Viking days down to be controlled by its neighbors back to recently gaining big oil wealth in the past couple of decades.

More on Vigeland/Oslo art: Gustav Vigeland's astonishing figures show the whole range of human life presented in stone and metal. There are nearly 200 sculptures, comprising 600 granite or bronze figures, in the park's large landscapes. All were designed by the Norwegian artist, whose museum, with over 1600 more statues (and his ashes) is just five minutes' walk away. Vigeland also designed the park's layout and setting. He was versatile, obsessive and abrasive. It took years of debate before Oslo Municipal Council, in 1922, approved plans for a sculpture park which would express the struggles and aspirations of humanity from birth to death as the artist desired. The result is astonishing in concept, amazing in execution and setting. Walk through the big iron gates and you're on a broad avenue leading to a bridge on whose parapets are mounted. The children shown are more conventional and appealing. Across the bridge rises a big fountain, in the middle of which a ring of giants supports a huge bronze bowl. Like everything else in the park, it's large in scale. From its center soars the monolith, a nearly 40'-high slab of Norwegian granite weighing 180 tons. The 121 writhing, creeping, struggling figures on its surface took three carvers 15 years to complete. There's no denying the drama here.

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

For details and visuals, etc., from our July 1-16, 2010, Norway Coast/Fjords/Arctic Circle cruise experience from Copenhagen on the Silver Cloud, check out this posting. This posting is now at 147,607 views. Nice to be hitting this high of a level for viewership. Appreciate the interest and follow-up questions/comments!!

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1227923

This picture shows the main, historic fortress next to where many cruise ships dock in Oslo. The fortress construction started around the late 1290’s. The very interesting and moving Norwegian Resistance museum can be visited there. Norwegian Royalty have been buried in the Royal Mausoleum in the castle. A portion of this fortress was replicated at the Norway pavilion at Disney’s Epcot Center.:

At the National Museum in Oslo, there is Munch art, including one of his two famed Scream painting that are in this Norway capital. At the separate Munch Museum, just a little distance away from central Oslo, there is the other Scream painting in Oslo. There are many other of his painting at this museum by the famed artist.:

Vigeland Park has a wide variety of outdoor sculptures in a super, wonderful setting that is a highlight for Oslo. There is a wide variety of art, water features, spectacular settings, etc. Its admission is free and the views and art are "priceless". It is open 24/7 so hours are not an issue.:

Here is Oslo’s City Hall exterior and one of its large interior spaces where the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded annually on December 10 each year. This structure houses the city council and city administration, plus art studios and galleries. The construction started in 1931 with the main structure completed in 1936. The German invasion of Norway in 1940 caused construction to stop, and it was not resumed until 1947. This City Hall was official opened in 1950. Its characteristic architecture, artworks and the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony makes it one of Oslo's most famous buildings. The roof of the eastern tower has a 49-bell carillon which plays every hour. This City Hall is situated in central downtown Oslo dramatically overlooking the scenic harbor area.:

Oslo is not as old and historic as Copenhagen and Stockholm.

...

Both of these capitals of Sweden and Denmark have had much longer recent histories of power and wealth, while Oslo is "newer" in many ways.

I think the "recent" history is an important note. All three cities were founded between 1000 and 1050 AD, but Oslo actually still has buildings from this early period. Gamle Aker Kirke (rarely visited, because medieval architecture is generally a bit too plain for non-historians) was built in 1080, and even the Akershus Fortress next to the cruise pier dates to 1290, putting it roughly the same age as the oldest buildings in Stockholm and Copenhagen.

However, since Norway was passed back and forth between the other two Scandinavian countries for most of the last 500 years, it doesn't have the 16th-18th century splendor we typically associate with "European history."

As for the original question...

If you're interested in sightseeing, I would choose to visit both Stockholm and Oslo. You can see quite a few of the highlights of each place in a day, and they're surprisingly different cities.

If you're more focused on shopping, definitely choose two days in Stockholm. The shopping in Stockholm is vastly better than in Oslo (in addition to being cheaper).

The deciding factor for me would be does Eurodam dock or is it a tender port in Stockholm. Royal Princess tendered about 2 hrs from Stockholm as it was to large to dock.

We are planning another Baltic cruise for 2015 and will definitely be taking a smaller ship.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Royal Princess docks in Nynasham which is a 1 hour train ride into Stockholm. it is absolutely a pain in the butt. I still can't imagine missing Oslo in favor of more time in Stockholm. just my opinion, we all have different priorities.

Stockholm was our favorite port. We ended there, but we easily could have spent more than two days.

FWIW if you are eventually planning on doing a Norwegian Fjord cruise there might be a way of working in Oslo on that cruise.

We never got to go to Oslo, but we also thought Stockholm was our favorite port on our cruise.

that aside, if this is your only time cruising the Baltics, I would try and see as many places as you can. if that means one day in Stockholm instead of two, but you also get Oslo.

Cheers

Len

Not an easy or simple choice. Both, however, are winners. Neither is a loser. In 2008, we had a full day in Oslo and like it very much. BUT, Oslo is not as old and historic as Copenhagen and Stockholm. Our cruise finished in Stockholm and we had two full days there. Worked very well for us. Below are some of my notes that I have shared previously with others. Plus, some of my visuals. Hope this helps a little.

 

How major is your interest in arts??

 

People will sometimes ask how Oslo compares to Stockholm and Copenhagen. Much of the difference is about the contrast of Oslo's more contemporary great art/design . . .

 

I'd like to claim the opposite that Stockholm also is well know for it's arts and contemporariness.

There is plenty of Art in Stockholm as well, like National museum at Blasieholmen, Moderna museet at Djurgården, Millesgården.

Other art museums include;

Gustav III's antique museum which is the oldest art/sculpture museum in Sweden and was established in 1794.

Prins Eugens Waldemarsudde which contains arts made by Prince Eugen.

Östasiatiska musset which contains archaeological artefacts and arts from East Asia in general and Kina in particular.

More about arts in Stockholm can be found here:

http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Konstmuseer_och_konsthallar_i_Stockholmhttp://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20121005-mini-guide-to-design-in-stockholm

http://www.scandinaviandesign.com/b3/

http://www.timeout.com/stockholm/features/339/20-great-things-to-do-in-stockholm

Also there is several subway stations which have been decorated with arts.

http://www.bbc.com/travel/slideshow/20120709-stockholms-underground-subway-art

I think the "recent" history is an important note. All three cities were founded between 1000 and 1050 AD, but Oslo actually still has buildings from this early period. Gamle Aker Kirke (rarely visited, because medieval architecture is generally a bit too plain for non-historians) was built in 1080, and even the Akershus Fortress next to the cruise pier dates to 1290, putting it roughly the same age as the oldest buildings in Stockholm and Copenhagen. However, since Norway was passed back and forth between the other two Scandinavian countries for most of the last 500 years, it doesn't have the 16th-18th century splendor we typically associate with "European history."

Desdichado62: I'd like to claim the opposite that Stockholm also is well know for it's arts and contemporariness. There is plenty of Art in Stockholm as well' date=' like National museum at Blasieholmen, Moderna museet at Djurgården, Millesgården.[/quote']

 

Yes, excellent points above to add more depth and detail on the varied "histories" for both Stockholm and Oslo. Appreciate these added background items, links, insights.

 

When asking for more ideas on these boards, it is always good to share, upfront, what your personal tastes and desires are for your likes, loves and interests. It helps us respond better when know more of that key background. Hopefully, the OP, boyznme, will share reactions to this range of info, post added questions, etc.

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

Back from doing a 14-day Celebrity Solstice, Jan. 20-Feb. 3, 2014, Sydney to Auckland adventure on this ship and getting a big sampling for the wonders of "down under” before and after this cruise. Go to:

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1974139

for much more information and lots of wonderful pictures on these amazing sights in this great part of the world. Now at 65,319 views for this fun posting.

Thanks to everyone for all the replies. As we do more research we realized

far how Berlin is from the port when we arrive there. Now knowing this,

we are probably going to take the Princess cruise in and out of Wamemunde, Germany instead. This cruise will stop one day in each Copenhagen and Oslo.

Thanks again.