I am flying into Milan on 10 September 2014.
I am considering two options:
Go directly to Bergamo (from Malpensa), spend 9 nights there and do 3 or 4 day trips from Bergamo, then spend 3 nights in Venice and then return to Milan for 2 nights and fly home.
Arrive in Milan and spend 2 nights, then go to Bologna for 7 nights and do 2 or 3 day trips from there, then spend 3 nights in Venice and then return to Milan for 2 nights and fly home.
I guess the question is, Bergamo or Bologna for the longest part of the stay?
I am looking for a more peaceful holiday and do not want to be travelling from city to city / hotel to hotel every second or third day. The "speed" of both these itinerary options suit me fine.
The last time I was in Italy was in 1982 - so, basically, all will be new to me. But, at the same time, I do not want to try and see all of Italy in two weeks!
I am a 54 year old female traveller, travelling on my own. My interests are more relaxed than frenetic. Good food, interesting/beautiful places, long walks, people watching, photography.
I have done my share of museums, churches, art galleries. Although, I will still pick one or two that pique my interest, but my purpose will not be to go into every single one I come across.
Any thoughts or any problems you see with either of these itineraries will be appreciated.