If we'd left the same evening, I think we'd have remembered Samarkand as beautiful but exhausting. Staying longer made it much more enjoyable.

One thing I'd mention is not trying to compare Samarkand with Bukhara.

People often ask which city is "better," but they're completely different.

Samarkand impresses with its monumental architecture and grand squares. Bukhara feels more intimate and atmospheric. We loved both for different reasons, and I'm glad we gave each city enough time rather than rushing through them.

I'd definitely stay at least two nights.

I completely agree. Many visitors spend the whole day moving from one monument to another and never experience the city itself.

Take some time to sit in a café overlooking Registan, browse Siyob Bazaar without rushing, or simply walk through the mahallas. Samarkand isn't just about monumental architecture; it's also about its everyday rhythm.

One evening we wandered through the old neighbourhoods behind Bibi-Khanym without any particular destination in mind. There were children playing outside, neighbours chatting over tea and the smell of fresh bread coming from small bakeries. Those few hours remain some of my strongest memories of Samarkand, even though they weren't part of any sightseeing plan.

The question isn't whether you can do it—it's whether you'll want to.

Samarkand changes dramatically throughout the day. Registan in the early morning feels completely different from Registan after sunset when the buildings are illuminated. We found ourselves returning to the same places simply because the atmosphere kept changing.