Gemara

(Mishnah): There are three regions (of Eretz Yisrael) regarding marriage: Yehudah, Ever ha'Yarden and Galil. One cannot force his wife to move to a different region.

Within a region one can force his wife to move from one city to another, or from a large city to another large city. One cannot force his wife to move from a city to a big city, or vice-versa;

One can force his wife to move from a bad place to a nice place, but not from a nice place to a bad place;

Gemara - Question: Granted, one cannot force his wife to move from a big city to a city, for everything is found in a big city, but not in a city. Why can't he force her to move from a city to a big city?

Answer: This is like R. Yosi bar Chanina taught; that living in a large city is hard - "They blessed all the people who volunteered to live in Yerushalayim."

Rishonim

The Rif and Rosh (13:17) bring the Mishnah and Gemara.

Rif and Rosh: A Tosefta teaches that the three regions apply when a man was Mekadesh a woman of his region. If a man of Yehudah was Mekadesh a woman of Galil, we force her to go (with him), for he married her on this condition.

Ran (DH Aval): A Yehudah man can force a woman to go from a big city in Galil to a city in Yehudah. He cannot say 'since I could force you to do so, all the more so I can force you to go from a big city in Galil to a city in Galil.' He can force her only to do what she (implicitly) agreed to.

Chelkas Mechokek (EH 74:4): It is not clear whether or not he can force her to go another city in Galil of the same size. Also, it is not clear whether or not he can remain in her place, or if she can say 'I want to live in your place', for it is as if he stipulated.

Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 13:16): Every land has cities and villages. Regarding marriage there are three lands of Eretz Yisrael: Yehudah, Ever ha'Yarden, and Galil.

Rambam (17): If a man married a woman in a different land, we force her to go to live with him, or he divorces her without a Kesuvah. He married her on this Tanai, even though he did not specify. If a man married a woman from his land, he cannot force her to go to another land. He can force her to go from one city to another, or from one village to another in that land. He cannot force her to go from a city to a village or vice-versa, for there are advantages of each over the other.

Question (Rosh): The Yerushalmi says that the Mishnah applies to a man who was Mekadesh a woman of a different region. If a man of Yehudah was Mekadesh a woman of Yehudah, we force him to leave. We force her to leave if she is from the same region, but not if she is from a different region. 'I, Ploni of Yehudah, married Plonis of Yehudah' - we force her. This is unlike the Tosefta!

Answer #1 (R. Tam, cited in Rosh): The Mishnah discusses forcing him. If he married a woman in his region, we do not force him to leave. All the more so if he married a woman in her region, he cannot force her to leave, for a woman has more rights than a man. The Mishnah and Tosefta teach that if he married her in his native region and she is from elsewhere, we do not force him to leave. Since they are different provinces and caravans are not frequent between them, he will not be able to stay aware of happenings in his hometown. If he married her in her region, we force him to leave. The text of the Tosefta says 'we force him to leave for he married her on this condition.' If both of them are from the same place and he married her elsewhere, we force him to leave, even from a city to a big city or vice-versa. If they are both from the same region and he is from a city and she is from a big city or vice-versa, and he married her in his city, she cannot force him to leave. All the more so if he married her in her city, he cannot force her to leave, since they are different size cities. If they are similar cities, she not force him to go to her city. We learn from "Be'ulas Ba'al" - she is Oleh (ascends) with her husband, but does not descend. Also, he can travel to see his friends, but it is improper for a woman to go outside. The Yerushalmi teaches that if a man married, in his city, a woman from another region, we do not force him to leave. If he married a woman in his region, we force him, i.e. to go to her city of a similar size.

Rebuttal (and Answer #2 - Rabbeinu Meir, brought in Rosh): The Yerushalmi connotes that he has more rights than her! It says that he can force her to go to Eretz Yisrael or Yerushalayim, but she cannot force him. The Yerushalmi discusses forcing her. The Tosefta teaches that if he was Mekadesh, in his region, a woman from another region, he cannot force her to leave. He cannot say that it does not matter to her. She can say that she became adjusted here and wants to stay. If a Yehudah man was Mekadesh a woman in Galil, even if he went to Galil and was Mekadesh her Stam, he forces her to go to Yehudah. It says 'if he married her', even though it mentioned Kidushin, to teach that even if Nisu'in was elsewhere, he can force her, for Nisu'in was based on Kidushin. It is as if the Kidushin was on condition that they live in Yehudah, where he lived at the time. The Yerushalmi teaches that if he was from Yehudah and married her in Galil, since Nisu'in was in Galil we do not force her to go to Yehudah. If he married her in Yehudah and she returned to her father, he can force her to return to him. The Yerushalmi mentions what he wrote, for where they do not write Kesuvos they write their regions, to know when he can force her.

Poskim

Shulchan Aruch (EH 75:1): If a man married a woman in a different land, we force her to go to live with him, or he divorces her without a Kesuvah or Tosefes. He married her on this Tnai, even though he did not specify.

Gra (3): The Shulchan Aruch holds that we must switch the text of the Yerushalmi to be like the Tosefta. He can force her no matter where the Nisu'in was.

Darchei Moshe (1): When the Tur cites Rabbeinu Meir, the text should say 'even if he did not marry her in Yehudah (his land, rather, in a third land).' However, if he married her in her land, he cannot force her. Why didn't the Tur say that Rabbeinu Meir argues with the Rif and Rambam?

Beis Shmuel (2): Shiltei ha'Giborim (65a:2) changes the text of the Tur to say 'if he did not marry her in Galil (her land).' The Bach says that Rabbeinu Meir distinguishes between whether or not he delayed in her land after Nisu'in. This is wrong. Rather, he distinguishes between Nisu'in and Kidushin. Perhaps the Tur discusses one who was Mekadesh in Galil a woman not from Galil, and we can leave the text 'even if he did not marry her in Galil (rather, in her land, he can force her).'

Rema: He cannot make her go from a city to a big city, or vice-versa in (one - it seems that this word should be deleted) Galil, even though he stipulated to take her from Galil to Yehudah.

Shulchan Aruch (ibid.): If one married a woman in his land, he cannot force her to go to another land. He can force her to go from one city to another, or from one village to another in those lands. He cannot force her to go from a city to a village or vice-versa.

Chelkas Mechokek (5): He cannot force her to go to a village only if both of them live in cities. He cannot force her to go to a city only if both of them live in villages.

Rema: Some say that if both of them are from one land and he married her elsewhere, she can force him to live in her land, even from a village to a city or vice-versa. If both of them are from one land and he married her there, neither can force the other to go from a village to a city or vice-versa, but she can force him to go to her place if it is the same (both are villages or both are cities).

Chelkas Mechokek (7): R. Tam holds contrary to the other Poskim. The only case when she cannot force him is when it will harm him, i.e. he married her in his place, and she is in a different land or a different size city.