Gee, could it be our many-recent-screen-names member?

Can you believe the multiple Forum personalities but all with the same contrary know-it-all attitide.
It really is sad.

I agree with the posts who suggest that you are trying to see too much. I've always like Rick Steves' idea that you should assume you'll be back.

I would suggest that you pare your itinerary down so that you see fewer countries, but more within the countries you do see.

I know that my circumstances are different from yours, but I tend to visit a single country per year for three weeks.

I always have guide books to help in my planning.

A good map is the first thing you need (and understand the scale of the map; many people don't have a clue about scale). A good guidebook or two or three or four is the next step. Cut your destinations down to the minimum number of destinations that you can live with. You won't experience much if you're on trains or airplanes most of the time, except airports and train stations, and while they can be fun just because you're in a foreign place, they aren't what you spent all that money to get to Europe to see.

Ignore everthing biztravefod has to say. She's some bitter rekinvented Fodorite who has nothing valuable or useful to add.

I really suggest to utilise the train as much as possible. Eurostar is great, for example. Planes/flying is a damn pain and really only worth it for medium --> long distance travel.

Plus, you're still doing too many countries. I did 3 weeks last year (Italy, France, UK (London) + The Netherlands (Amsterdam)), and this year we're doing 4 weeks in 2 or 3 countries. We learned our lesson (although we enjoyed it, less is more).

Really look at Jamikins' plan. It is just about perfect - time wise. Plus, it does a lot of what you said you wanted.

It gives you three of the world's great cities: London, Paris, Rome plus Venice and Florence.

It gives you a sampling of three quite different cultures, foods, etc.

It gives you some countryside and scenery - Tuscany.

Art - on a big scale: the Louvre, the Uffizi, the Sistine Chapel, etc. Speaking of Art, since you put it in as a choice, don't just spend a day in Florence. It is an art lovers dream city. If you do go to Paris, try to include Versailles.

It also gives you some great architecture.

From London, there is also Bath - lovely city for historians and Jane Austen Fans.

If Greece, however, is your dream, then do Greece in place of Italy (or Paris or London). Athens will be your big city (with museums and world class archeology sites) and the islands will be your scenery/countryside.

We all have trouble making choices for trips. You just have to so you are seeing and doing the most with your time and for the money spent, rather than spending a lot of money and time getting from place to place without seeing/experiencing much.

If you are planning to fly between cities, you might want to plan your trip by looking at the days flights are available and the departure times between destinations. DH and I visited London, Prague, Budapest, Berlin and Paris in 18 days. We used Easyjet to fly between all of the cities except Prague and Budapest and in that case we took a bus to Cesky Krumlov one day, then a shuttle to Linz and train to Budapest the next. On our travel days we booked early flights and arrived in the early afternoon, had time to check into our hotels and spend the afternoon on a guided bus tour or self-guided walking tour. Don't be discouraged by people who want you to stay longer and visit just a few locations, lots of us have done a whirlwind tour and survived!!!

Business must not be very good if biztravfod has time to write all those posts! Just saying... :-))

Ignore everthing biztravefod has to say. She's some bitter rekinvented Fodorite who has nothing valuable or useful to add>

well I thought her/his/its comments on your recent blog were right on!