Pyrgos is on the site of OTL Cavite City. New Constantinople is on Ambon, one of those dot-on-a-map islands of eastern Indonesia, south of Ceram. The Katepanate of Pahang is essentially Malaysia minus the Borneo parts plus Singapore. Singapore is a fairly new development there so while significant, it's not the capital.
The Contexts of Roman Society, Part 9: Cultural Differences and Commonalities, Speaking and Eating Pizza
Written Greek around 1650 was mostly standardized, with official grammars, spellings, and even a partial dictionary already in existence by that time. Certainly when one examines letters from the period it is clear that these standards were not always followed, even when education levels are taken into account, but the range of spelling alternatives was still smaller than, say, contemporary English.
The standardization of written Greek was a product of the ties of administration and trade connecting the empire. But spoken Greek showed a much greater diversity. Linguists usually break Greek-speakers of the period into 7 distinct groups, with smaller variations within the groups themselves.
The most significant, both numerically and historically, was the Aegean or Imperial Greek. Written Greek of the period was the transcription of Aegean Greek, that spoken across the themes that bordered the Aegean Sea, including the capital. When the era of mass primary education and printing arrived, this is the version of Greek that would become truly official, marginalizing although not eliminating the other dialects. In 1640 that process had barely begun.
Aegean Greek, because of its broad geographical and demographic scope, had many regional variations; a Thrakesian or Morean accent is easily noticeable to a denizen of Macedonia or Bithynia. However Cretan Greek was distinct enough for linguists to put it in its own category. The island had spent a quarter-millennium under Venetian rule, giving a substantial Italian influence to the local tongue absent in the rest of the Aegean. The inhabitants of Methoni and Koroni in the southwest Morea, because of their similar span under first Venetian and then Genoese rule, are typically included in the Cretan as opposed to Aegean Greek category.
This historical influence means that Cretan Greek had some similarities to Sicilian Greek, that form of Greek spoken throughout the Despotate. Greek there had been heavily influenced by the Italian speakers surrounding them, to an even greater extent than in Crete. But it was certainly not the same as that of Crete. The tongues of Venice and Naples might be lumped into a broad linguistic group called Italian, but they were not the same, and even the speech of Naples differed from that of Palermo or Messina.
Sicilian Greek had an eastern mirror in Syrian Greek. Syrian Greek was effectively Sicilian Greek, but with the local Italian influence replaced by local Arabic influence. Melkites, Arabic-speaking Orthodox, almost always, if they spoke Greek, would speak the Syrian Greek dialect.
Cypriot Greek had some similarities to both Cretan and Syrian Greek. There was some Arabic influence given its proximity to Syria, but not as much as the mainland. There was some Italian and French influence due to its century under Crusader rule, but not to the degree of Crete. What made Cypriot Greek quite distinct was its unique Sudanese [1] element from all the slaves that had been imported to work the sugar plantations. Numbering at least a quarter-million for the span of about 250 years, they inevitably shaped the language of the island, along with its genetic makeup and food-ways.
In Anatolia, the Greek of the central and eastern interior was of the Kappadokian variety, although the dialect was spread out over a much larger area than the specific region. It was noticeable for its level of Turkish influence, with Armenian and Kurdish elements becoming more significant as one went east. While numerically small compared to Imperial Greek (the Anatolikon and Armeniakon themes combined had less people than any one of the six Aegean themes), Kappadokian Greek had a somewhat outsized significance given that its speakers were disproportionately represented in the Empire’s poets and musicians.
Finally there was Pontic Greek, which in terms of area covered both the Pontic coast of Anatolia as well as the Tauric peninsula. In terms of foreign influence there was a Turkish component, although rather small compared to Kappadokian. But added to that was a noticeable influence from the Caucasus and even some filtering down from the steppes north of the mountains. It also had a significance larger than its number of speakers would suggest, as the Pontic region and people were disproportionately active both in naval construction and maritime activity, both military and commercially. Finally due to the nature of hiring tutors, when Russians and especially Georgians learned Greek, they usually learned the Pontic variety.
There is debate about how understandable different dialect-speakers were to each other. While spoken Greek certainly varied far more than written, it seems that at least in the major towns and cities and along the main trade routes, one could communicate without too much trouble. It was when one got into gradually more rural and isolated areas where the difficulties would mount.
As just one isolated but hardly unique example, in 1651 villagers in the Kephalate of Akilsene needed an interpreter, their village priest, to communicate their grievances with the Adrianople-born Kephale, even though everyone involved, villagers, priest, and Kephale were all native Greek speakers. This linguistic hurdle was yet another obstacle that could hinder rural Romans from making their grievances known and getting them addressed. (And thus one future argument for a universal and standardized primary school education was to lessen corruption in regional governance by removing this obstacle.)
Thus cultural diversity throughout Rhomania should not be minimized, but simultaneously it should not be exaggerated. During the early and mid-1600s, across the Roman Empire this was the time when the famous Roman pizza etiquette was created, a near-universal phenomenon across the Roman world that still exists quite strongly to this day. Romans in Antioch and Ankyra and Adrianople would’ve spoken differently around the dinner table, but as early as 1650 if they were eating pizza there were certain standards that all would’ve observed, with failure to do so a possible source of significant social shame.
Pizza came to Rhomania from the Despotate of Sicily [2] in the 1620s, with an establishment serving pizza in Constantinople in 1626. The then-Eparch and future Emperor Demetrios III was a prominent customer, and that example encouraged its consumption by the elite of the capital. This massively spiked its social cachet, further fueling its spread. By 1650 even relatively small towns in the Anatolian plateau such as Gangra with only a few thousand people had pizza-eating inhabitants. How far the practice had spread into the countryside by this point is unclear, but even here it was clearly making strides.
The rules were fairly simple. Pizza was never to be consumed alone, as it is often consumed in modern western countries. It was to be accompanied by a salad or fruit or both. But these vegetables and fruit were side dishes, and could only be side dishes. Fruit or vegetables absolutely could not be on the pizza itself, the only exceptions being the contents and bases of the sauce, cheese, and any seasonings. In this range there was much variation with types of cheeses, sauces, and seasonings, but in terms of toppings as one would order in a restaurant, only types of meat were allowed. (There was some regional variation in what counted as meat, specifically types of seafood and eggs, for this purpose. Cyprus, Crete, and the Pontic Coast also included mushrooms, onions, and later bell peppers as ‘meat’ for this purpose, which the rest of the Roman world simply took as unnecessary confirmation that those Romans were weird.)
It should further be noted that for many Roman pizza-consumers at this time, this was largely a non-issue given the expense of meat. Many pizza-consumers were eating what would today be considered a simple cheese pizza with no additional toppings, although they experimented with seasonings and sauces. However this factor also helps explain the strength of the pizza etiquette at this time. For the vast majority of Romans, eating pizza with meat toppings would be a special event, possibly marking a significant event and done in public. In that context, keeping etiquette, avoiding shame, and avenging insults was especially important. (This also explains the relative weakening in later times, when eating meat is more commonplace, and thus pizza becomes less of a special event and more likely to be something to be eaten on a meet with friends.)
How or why these specific rules arose, as well as their practically-universal adoption, is a mystery. It does seem to have originated in Constantinople and then exported to the provinces. Some believe its origins lie in nothing else than the personal preferences of Demetrios Sideros, or perhaps that of Empress Jahzara. There is an apocryphal story of a cook trying to serve her pizza with pineapple on it, and her responding with ordering the removal of his tongue. That was either an extreme overreaction, or a sign that she was a champion of justice. Opinions differ on that to this day.
In this possible explanation, the meat-only pizza was simply a personal taste of the Imperial family, which was then copied by senior officials, and then by their juniors first in the capital and then in the provinces. The social rationale for the customs came later, as a way of explaining this seemingly random pickiness.
How or why these specific rules arose, as well as their practically-universal adoption, is a mystery. But in their social ramifications, they seem to speak to the great importance Romans placed on being fair and just and honest in their dealings with each other. Only meat could be on pizza, so any other topping on pizza was, in effect, ‘fake meat’. Serving someone pizza with ‘fake meat’ was thus an accusation, an insult. To suggest one’s meat was fake was to say one’s word was false. For a romantic partner to serve this was to charge the other with unfaithfulness; for a business partner to serve this was to charge the other with fraud.
This was taken extremely serious. In 1648 and 1650 major court cases were brought in Mystras and Euchaita, nearly opposite sides of the Empire, respectively. The defendant had been publicly served pizza with vegetables on it, rather than on the side, and the defendant had sued those responsible with libel. Given the public nature of the accusation, and the importance of reputation for social life and economic activity, nobody involved, including the judges, thought this was a joke.
Examples still can be seen today. Many breakups in Roman society due to unfaithfulness involve one presenting the other with a pizza with ‘fake meat’ on it. And more devious partners will present the pizza but hide the ‘fake meat’, for to accept and especially to eat the ‘fake meat’ is an admission that the charge is accurate. When the consumer is male, sometimes the charge of ‘one’s meat is fake’ is meant to be taken literally, as opposed to a character slight.
This pizza presentation/accusation was not done just between private individuals, but manifested as early as the 1650s in a uniquely Roman form of public protest, the gifting of ‘fake meat’ pizzas to public officials. In this context, it was a clear accusation that the official(s) had failed to fulfill their duties vis-à-vis those presenting the pizza, and they were being called out for their failure.
This was not some light-hearted gesture either, some light tease. It was a major charge, and not one made lightly, and not one that could be ignored, as can be seen in some of the earliest examples in the 1650s. A Kephale had been padding his pockets by speculating in grain, driving up prices already high due to poor harvests. Some of the suffering poor in response presented him with a pizza with fruit on it, purportedly pineapple although that is uncertain. Given the context of high food prices, the expense of the dish was deliberate, to give additional teeth to the accusation.
This was not enough to change the Kephale’s course though, with the escalation coming in a form Chinese peasantry would’ve instantly recognized and understood. An utterly destitute and starving family, bereft of hope, hanged themselves from trees outside the Kephale’s house. It was certainly an escalation, but along the same lines of the pizza, an accusation, a reproach, that one’s word had been false and that one had failed to do their duty, and for that there would be consequences.
Thus Roman pizza etiquette is not just some quirky custom of which foreign tourists should be aware so that locals can’t get a joke at their expense. The way Romans used pizza as more than just something to eat expressed an important aspect of Roman social life. It spoke of the need to be true to one’s word and to do one’s duty to those it was owed, and it spoke of the dire consequences that would arise when one failed in these obligations. And no one, not even the Basileus himself, would be exempt.
[1] The catch-all Roman term for sub-Saharan Africans that are not Ethiopians.
[2] Southern Italy IOTL also gave us spaghetti.
They are our team after all.
