Skip to main content
  • Original article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Savoring the past, preserving the future: a mixed-methods examination of culinary traditions among Pontic Greeks in Northern Greece

Abstract

This mixed-methods study investigates how Pontic Greeks in Western Macedonia, Greece, preserve and adapt their culinary traditions amid modern challenges. Employing survey questionnaires (n = 390), interviews, and participant observation, we explored sociodemographic attributes, lifestyle factors, and food preferences. Statistical and thematic analyses revealed a strong preference for traditional delicacies, such as pisia (a type of pancake) and tanomenon sorva (yogurt soup), alongside a notable shift from butter to olive oil driven by health considerations. Qualitative findings underscored the deep cultural and emotional significance of these foods, revealing themes such as intergenerational knowledge transmission, urbanization’s impact, and the dual role of heritage and convenience in shaping food choices. Integrated data analysis revealed a convergence regarding the importance of preserving culinary traditions in the face of societal change, illustrating the dynamic nature of Pontic Greek gastronomy. This study demonstrates how personal, cultural, environmental, and societal factors influence the maintenance and evolution of these culinary practices.

Introduction

Food is a significant way to identify and distinguish regional and ethnic cultures [1]. Culinary practices indicate the cultural heritage of Greeks of Pontic origin and act to express their identity [2]. Pontic Greeks, originally from the Black Sea region (Karadeniz) in northern Turkey, were displaced to Greece during the twentieth century and sustained their culinary heritage [3].

The preservation of this culinary heritage is largely due to oral tradition, which has shaped the collective memory of Pontic Greeks. The power of oral tradition lies in its ability to preserve and actively transmit cultural knowledge [4]. Pontic women have been instrumental in passing on customs and ways of life from their homeland [5]. Their central roles in social, educational, and family contexts have facilitated this crucial transmission [6, 7]. Specifically, culinary knowledge has been passed down through generations, often from grandmother to granddaughter, creating a lineage of culinary traditions [8].

Their role underscores how collective memory has maintained the cultural heritage of Pontic Hellenism for over a century [5]. This shared understanding of the past includes experiences, knowledge, and tales transmitted across generations [9]. As a result, the Pontic Greek identity remains strong and resilient. Key elements of modern Pontic Greek identity include trauma [10], music, dance, songs, and culinary practices [11].

Although food is important for cultural preservation and identity development, scholarly works on the Pontic Greek community have primarily focused  on its history and culture [12,13,14], overlooking its cuisine [15, 16]. However, studying traditional foods (TFs) and their preparation methods is critical for understanding the complex connections between food quality, cultural identity, and where these culinary traditions come from [17]. In addition to contributing to the preservation of cultural heritage, this research provides the basis to determine and possibly establish the authenticity of unique culinary preparations [18]. Therefore, food has cultural significance and is associated with heritage, identity, and cultural values [19, 20]. As Swinbank [8] notes, food memories remain significant for refugees because they preserve identity and culture. The integration of  Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) with other  regional Greek cuisines has enriched the broader Greek culinary landscape [21].

This study explores how culinary practices safeguard the culinary traditions of Pontic Greeks living in the Western Macedonia region of northern Greece. Using a mixed-methods approach, including questionnaires, interviews, and participant observation, it aims to enhance our understanding of the relationship between culinary traditions and cultural identity in this community.

Examining the cuisine of the Pontic Greeks: factors and theoretical foundations

Foodways of the Pontic Greeks: a theoretical and multidisciplinary approach

A multidisciplinary lens is necessary to analyze the foodways of Pontic Greeks [22]. This research highlights how foodways play a vital role in maintaining cultural heritage and identity. Foodways are integral to human identity, as they reflect  the social and cultural significance of dietary customs [23, 24]. Emphasizing the communicative power of food [20], we build on the work of scholars who connect food choices to self-perception [25, 26] while noting their symbolic significance in social interaction [27]. Using the framework of Almansouri et al. [29], we emphasize the significant impact of heritage and geographical location on cooking methods. As Bourdieu [28] argued, people use cultural practices such as food choices to differentiate themselves socially and indicate their status. In conclusion, our multidisciplinary approach provides valuable insights into the intricate relationships between food, culture, and eating habits within the Pontic Greek community.

The evolution and diversity of Greek Cuisine

Greek cuisine evolved over millennia, initially based on plant-based foods [30] before incorporating influences from the Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman empires [31]. Greek refugees from Anatolia, including Pontic Greeks, at the beginning of the 20th  century further enriched the regional culinary landscape in areas such as Macedonia and Epirus [15]. However, class distinctions, stereotypes, and the drive to “Europeanization” of Greek cuisine have overshadowed many local food traditions [32, 33].

Although numerous regional cuisines remain underexplored [16], the Cretan diet stands out as a notable exception, widely recognized as an exemplary representation of the Mediterranean diet [34, 35]. This disparity underscores the need to acknowledge and promote Greece’s culinary heritage.

The widespread use of olive oil in modern Greek cuisine [36, 37] contrasts with the traditions of Pontic Greeks and Vlachs, who primarily used butter. This highlights the complex nature of Greek culinary identity, in which regional variations and historical influences coexist. As Epikouros [38] stated, “Greek cuisine, much like the Greek soul, cannot be easily defined”.

In recent years, there has been renewed interest in regional Greek cuisine, with publications highlighting local recipes and culinary customs [39,40,41,42,43]. However, additional research, particularly into marginalized cuisines such as those of Pontic Greeks, is crucial to fully appreciate and preserve the diversity of Greek culinary heritage [16].

A thorough examination of the local culinary traditions of groups like the Greeks of Pontic descent could enhance consumer understanding and appreciation of their nutritional benefits, potentially leading to wider acceptance [44].

Fat sources in Pontic Greek cuisine: the role of olive oil and butter

Olive oil is well recognized as an important element of the Mediterranean diet and a staple of traditional Greek cuisine. Greece ranks among the top consumers and producers of olive oil globally (European Commission, 2023). However, Pontic Greeks have traditionally used predominantly  cow butter. The consumption of butter and olive oil in Greek communities shows the diversity of Greek cuisine, shaped by its cultural heritage, geography, and history [45]. This difference in fat sources between Pontic Greeks and other Greek populations is a significant element of their unique culinary identity. Furthermore, this variation might affect how Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) fits into  the wider context of Greek culinary traditions, particularly given  the global focus on the Mediterranean diet.

Intergenerational transmission of culinary practices among Pontic Greeks

Passing down culinary practices from one generation to the next plays a vital role in maintaining cultural identity and promoting social unity. As a cultural element, food embodies the history and identity of a community [46]. Families pass down gastronomic knowledge across generations and adapt and change these customs [47]. This process holds particular significance for Pontic Greeks, as their culinary traditions support community bonds and strengthen their sense of identity [2].

Pontic Greek Cuisine: a fusion of cultural and geographical influences

Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) is a unique amalgamation of cultural and geographical influences [48]. Seasonal changes, customs, and rituals, along with the religious and cultural importance of the yearly celebration cycle, shaped its evolution [49]. Fundamental staples in their food culture include cereals, pre-baked pasta, vegetables, wild greens, and dairy products. Those who inhabited coastal towns had abundant access to fish from the Black Sea [50]. Meanwhile, in the mountainous regions, locals used to consume river fish or purchase salted fish sourced from the nearby sea [49]. Although meat was a rare indulgence reserved for special celebrations, the Greeks of Pontus complemented their diet with various  fruits and nuts.

The Pontic culinary tradition owes its diversity to the cohabitation of Pontic Greeks and Armenians in the region and continues to be carried forward by Turks to this day [51]. A variety of foods and dishes originating from the Greeks of Pontus are produced and cooked in the same way or are found in a similar form in the Black Sea region of Turkey. In addition, many of these foods and recipes have the same or similar names. The migration of Pontic Greeks to neighboring Russia, along with the presence of affluent Pontic Greeks near the commercial hubs along the southern Black Sea coast, led to the influence of Russian gastronomy on PGC [51, 52]. Some dishes of the gastronomy of the Pontic Greeks are common in Asia Minor and broader Anatolia, while several dishes are influenced by Turkish meat-based cuisine. Thus, PGC represents a synthesis  of Pontic Greek, Armenian, Turkish, and Russian culinary influences.

Methods

Study design and ethics

The present study used a parallel convergent mixed-methods design [53] to investigate whether Greeks of Pontic origin safeguard the culinary traditions of their descendants. This model involves simultaneous qualitative and quantitative data, with results converging to provide a comprehensive understanding of the research topic.

The research protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC-UOWM) of the University of Western Macedonia (REC-UOWM: 11/05–03-2021). In food studies, ethical issues can easily arise, and adherence to ethical principles is prioritized, including informed consent, ensuring participant anonymity, and maintaining ongoing communication [54].

The study involved  three concurrent stages: survey distribution, interviews, and participant observation. The survey was used as a quantitative tool [55]. Furthermore, a qualitative research design was adopted [56], guided by a social constructivism approach [57], using interviews. Finally, participant observation involved building knowledge, maintaining an observatory field journal, and using all our senses to record data [58].

Study setting and recruitment

This study was conducted among inhabitants of rural and urban areas in the Western Macedonia region of Greece (Fig. 1). Many Greeks from the Pontus region initially  settled in this area. According to data from 1926, 9377 families of Pontic Greek origin settled in Western Macedonia [59].

Fig. 1
figure 1

The region of Western Macedonia is highlighted in pink

For the first phase (survey), non-probability sampling (convenience and snowball sampling) was used to recruit study participants [60]. The sample size was set at a minimum of 384 participants, calculated using Cochran’s formula for unknown population size, with a 95% confidence level and a 5% margin error [61]. Initially, 407 individuals aged 18–94 years consented to take part in the survey. However, due to missing data (n = 17), the final sample consisted of 390 participants.

In the second parallel phase, we  conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 women recognized for their expertise in traditional food knowledge (TFK) of Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC). Purposive sampling was used until data saturation was achieved [62].

In the final phase, we conducted participant observation [63] with three women and two men known for their expertise in preparing traditional foods (TFs). This approach allowed us to document their techniques, providing a deep understanding of their cooking practices. All data were verified and peer-reviewed for validity [64].

Development of the survey questionnaire and the interview guide

This study used a questionnaire to explore demographics, Pontic Greek identity, food self-sufficiency, preferences for traditional delicacies, and food choices among Greeks of Pontic origin. The questionnaire, guided by Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik and Warner [65], Vergeti [11, 66], and Galanidou-Balfousia [67], included simplified and modified versions of Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ1 and FFQ2) [68,69,70,71] and a Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) with a 1–7 scale [72]. This questionnaire was tested in a pilot survey and consisted of seven sections. The main sub-questionnaires (FFQ1, FFQ2, and FCQ) demonstrated high reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha values of α = 0.898, 0.799, and 0.845, respectively.

For each FFQ, participants indicated their consumption frequency using five categories: “never,” “rarely (less than once per month),” “monthly (1–3 times per month),” “weekly (1 time per week),” and “daily (1 time per day).” We  then converted these categories into daily intake values: “never” = 0; “rarely” = 0.02; “monthly” = 0.07; “weekly” = 0.14; “daily” = 1.

We designed a  semi-structured interview guide to complement this quantitative data. After conducting three pilot interviews to refine the questions, following the recommendations of Shakir and Rahman [73], we compiled the final semi-structured interview guide (Table 1).

Table 1 Interview guide

Data collection

Data were collected  in three phases. The first phase, from February 2022 to March 2023, used a pre-tested questionnaire distributed via Google Forms (https://forms.gle/zAu2VYKPioYEmHW6A). The survey was promoted through online channels (e.g., social media, email) and printed materials such as flyers . Additionally, we placed posters with QR codes for the survey in public services and universities .

The second phase, conducted from August 2021 to September 2022, consisted of  semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 10 to 40 min each. These interviews were held outdoors following COVID-19 safety measures [74]. One interview was conducted via telephone since one participant was sick with COVID-19. All interviews were audio/video recorded, using smartphones and additional equipment (e.g. external microphone, tripod), with participants’ consent.

In the third phase (August - October 2022), we documented participant observations of traditional food preparations [75]. These observations provided rich descriptive and interpretive data on these traditional practices.

Data analysis

Quantitative section

Statistical analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using various statistical tools (Microsoft Excel for Mac 16, IBM SPSS Statistics 26, GraphPad Prism 9, and RawGraphs). Sociodemographic data and responses from the Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs) and the Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) underwent statistical analysis. To analyze associations between categorical variables, we used the chi-square test. For non-normally distributed variables, we used the Mann–WhitneyU and Kruskal–Wallis tests. When Kruskal–Wallis test statistics demonstrated a significant effect (p < 0.05), pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction were performed. Before these analyses, we conducted normality tests (Kolmogorov–Smirnov), reliability tests (Cronbach’s alpha), and multiple response analyses.

Furthermore, preliminary tests were performed to validate the use of exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The suitability of the dataset for EFA was assessed through examination of the correlation matrix, Bartlett’s test of sphericity, and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy. The number of factors retained in the scale was determined  using a scree plot.

Qualitative section

Thematic analysis

Qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis following the six-step framework described by Braun and Clarke [76]. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using Atlas.ti software (version 23.1.1) to ensure precise and clear identification of themes [77]. We  coded the data independently and developed initial themes, which were then reviewed and merged in the second phase. The final themes were : (1) Transmission of culinary traditions; (2) Changing ingredients due to health considerations or convenience; (3) Preference and interest of the younger generation; (4) Concern about the potential erosion of culinary traditions; (5) Efforts to preserve the culinary traditions.

Merging quantitative and qualitative findings

Following the approach outlined by Fetters et al. [78], we identified areas of convergence and divergence between the two datasets and mapped these findings onto a visual representation (a joint display). This joint display, inspired by the work of Fetters and Tajima [79], allows for a deeper exploration of the dynamic interaction between quantitative data and the qualitative narratives associated with the Pontic Greek culinary traditions.

Results

Quantitative results

This study revealed key sociodemographic and lifestyle attributes. The sample of participants (n = 390) consisted of 59.74% females (mean age = 50.21 ± 13.817, range = 18–86) and 40.26% males (mean age = 52.68 ± 14.227, range = 21–94). Table 2 presents the sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics of the study participants by age group.

Table 2 Comparative analysis of sociodemographic and lifestyle attributes across age groups in the study population

The statistical analysis demonstrated significant associations between age groups and several variables. For instance, 34.1% of urban residents were between 38 and 57 years old, showing a marked age demographic in city areas. Furthermore, individuals in this age group were more likely to have Pontic ancestry from both parents, did not grow vegetables, and were married.

Educational level was associated with factors such as heritage, vegetable cultivation, marital status, cooking responsibility, and residence. Additionally, those responsible for cooking were significantly more likely to be female. The top-ranking aspects of Pontic Greek identity were rituals, music, songs and dance, and language. Cuisine was especially important among most females (72.8%), particularly those who were responsible for cooking, lived in urban areas, were postgraduates, and were unmarried with children.

The investigation of the most preferred traditional foods (TFs) and dishes of the Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) in the region of Western Macedonia revealed pisia (a type of pancake) (51%) as the most popular, followed by tanomenon sorva (yogurt soup) (40%), and chavitz (a type of porridge) (31%). RAWGraphs (https://rawgraphs.io/) was used to generate a circular dendrogram (Fig. 2) of the 15 most favored TFs and dishes of PGC in Western Macedonia.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Circular Dendrogram displaying preferences for traditional delicacies of Pontic Greek Cuisine

Furthermore, the statistical analysis showed associations  between preferences for traditional dishes and demographic factors such as age, gender, and place of residence. Younger participants (18–37) and town residents primarily favored pisia (62.1%). Tanomenon sorva was popular among  females (53.2%) and those over 38, particularly village residents. Chavitz was predominantly preferred by males (35.7%) and older individuals living in villages.

Significant correlations were found between age, residence, and preferences for pisia, varenika (a type of dumplings), and otia (a sweet, dough-based dessert). Delicacies like evriste (pre-baked pasta), mavrolachana (kale), trimman (soup with small crumbs of dough), sorvas nistisimos (soup made from grains and legumes), and chavitz were also linked to specific age groups, while gatmeria (a type of pie similar to perek) and perek (a type of pie made with baked thin sheets of dough) were associated with residence (Supplementary Material, Table S1). Interestingly, pligouri (bulgur) showed a significant gender preference. An alluvial diagram (Fig. 3), created using RAWGraphs, was used to better visualize the relationship between gender, food preference, and preference proportion. The diagram is divided into two main sections, one for males and one for females. Each section is divided into 11 smaller sections, one for each food preference. The width of each section corresponds to the proportion of people who prefer the specific  food. For example, the segment for pisia is the widest in the male section, suggesting that pisia is the most popular food choice among men. The segment for chavitz is the largest in the female section, indicating that chavitz is the most preferred food among women.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Alluvial diagram of gender differences in traditional delicacies preferences and proportions

Additionally, the analysis revealed a strong association  between preferences for makarina (dried homemade pasta), evriste, chavitz, pisia, and Pontic descent. The most frequently consumed traditional Pontic Greek delights included voutoron (butter), stypa (pickles), trachanas (fermented soup), foustoron (omelette), and wild greens. Pisia, tanomenon sorva, evriste, and makarina are also considered frequently consumed dishes (Table S2, Supplementary Material).

A Mann–Whitney U test showed significant gender differences in consumption patterns. Females significantly favored  pligouri (p = 0.002) and korkota (groats) (p = 0.021) compared to males, who consumed less trachanas than females (p = 0.028). According to the Kruskal–Wallis test, consumption patterns of traditional foods (TFs) significantly differ among various age groups. For instance, older age groups, particularly those between 58 and 77 and those above 78, consume more korkota (p = 0.013) and stypa (p = 0.000) than younger individuals (18–37 years old). Additionally, the consumption of evriste and chavitz was also significantly higher in groups aged 38–57 (p = 0.002) and those 78 years and older (p = 0.009) compared to the 18–37 year group, respectively.

Significant differences were also found between the place of residence and the average daily intake of several traditional delicacies (p < 0.05). Specifically, village residents consumed korkota, evriste, tanomenon sorva, and kolokytha (pumpkin) more frequently than town residents, whereas pisia was consumed in higher quantities in towns than in villages. Participants of  Pontic descent from both parents exhibited significantly higher consumption of korkota, stypa, evriste, and chavitz than those with only one parent of Pontic origin.

Furthermore, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted on a 10-item Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) using principal component analysis with Varimax rotation. The results confirmed the questionnaire’s high validity and revealed two factors, labeled “Health and Ethical Considerations” and “Convenience and Pleasure,” indicating different motivations behind food choices (Table S3, Supplementary Material). Figure 4 further illustrates the comparison of mean Likert scale ratings for various food choice motives, with emphasis on health importance (on a scale of 1–7). Health was rated as the most important factor in food choice. Sensory pleasure and mood enhancement followed in second and third place, respectively. Τhe choice of food, in terms of familiarity and tradition, came in second to last place.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Comparison of mean likert scale ratings for various food choice motives with emphasis on health importance

The FFQ2 data revealed that olive oil is the most frequently consumed staple among participants, followed by coffee or tea, bread, fresh salads, and dairy products. By comparison, fish or seafood, alcohol, and fast food are less commonly consumed. A Mann–Whitney U test compared olive oil and butter consumption, showing a statistically significant preference for olive oil (p < 0.001). A summary of this analysis can be found in Supplementary Material, Table S4.

Qualitative results

Results from interviews

The thematic analysis of the 11 interviews revealed five themes related to Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC): Cultural Heritage and Tradition, Health Considerations, Generational Change and Knowledge Transmission, Changes in Cooking Methods and Ingredients, and Urbanization and its Impact on Traditional Culinary Practices.

Cultural heritage and tradition

Participants frequently highlighted the significance of Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) as a cornerstone of their cultural heritage. Food and its associated practices serve as a representation of this heritage, showcasing the unique history, values, and identity of diverse social groups [46]. Family plays a central role in transmitting these traditions through shared meals, the passing down of recipes, and storytelling about the cultural significance of various dishes [1, 24]. For instance, W02 (personal communication, August 7, 2021) shared:

My culinary skills stem from my grandparents.

Likewise, W05 (personal communication, August 14, 2022) highlighted the role of the family in passing down traditions:

My grandfather instilled in us a love for Pontic traditions and food.

These personal accounts reflect  broader observations about the role of women in preserving culinary heritage. Bessière [80] notes that rural women, often grandmothers or mothers, are key figures in safeguarding traditional food knowledge (TFK). Historically, Pontic Greek women have been the primary guardians of culinary knowledge, responsible for feeding their families and communities while maintaining traditional practices [49]. Their kitchens have become symbolic spaces, representing not only food but also women’s lived experiences, acting as repositories of memory and history [2].

Eating traditional delicacies, such as those found in PGC, represents a meaningful journey into shared memories and histories. serving as a medium for the transmission of cultural values and practices across generations [20, 81, 82]. However, the transmission of these traditions is not static, especially among the younger population. While participants like W08 expressed a strong desire to pass down traditional dishes to their grandchildren, recent studies, such as the Hydria survey [37], reveal that younger generations in Greece may be deviating from traditional food practices. This shift is further evidenced by research on Greek college students [83]. While pre-pandemic food choice motives (FCMs), including convenience options, had re-emerged , a preference for home-cooked meals persisted. Furthermore, younger generations are actively adapting and reinterpreting TFK, reflecting a dynamic interplay between tradition and innovation (Juzwiak et al., 2018; Sharif et al., 2016)[84, 85].

Health considerations

Health consciousness plays a pivotal role in shaping dietary choices and adapting culinary traditions. The acknowledgment  of health consciousness by participants and their subsequent modification of traditional recipes further illustrates the dynamic nature of Pontic Greek culinary practices. Krystallis and Ness [86] found that health-conscious consumers prioritize quality and health when selecting food products. In the context of Greek consumers of Pontic origin, this translates to a preference for olive oil over butter due to its perceived health benefits. W01 consciously adapted Pontic delicacies by replacing butter with olive oil due to cholesterol concerns. Based on the interviews, there is a general tendency to choose olive oil rather than butter for health reasons, which was also evident from the data collected from the survey. This conscious effort to modify traditional recipes for health reasons shows the adaptability of these cooking traditions to contemporary health concerns.

The willingness to modify recipes while preserving their essence highlights the balance between respecting cultural heritage and prioritizing individual health. It underscores the notion that tradition and innovation can coexist, ensuring that Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) remains relevant and sustainable for future generations.

Generational change and knowledge transmission

A recurring theme was participants’ concern about the fading interest in Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) among younger generations. As an example, W03 (personal communication, July 6, 2022) expressed this concern:

Younger generations now prefer pre-prepared foods.

Likewise , W08 (personal communication, July 5, 2022) noted a potential discontinuity in transmission, stating, “My daughter does not enjoy most Pontic food and, hence, does not pass it on to her children.” However, participant W05 (personal communication, August 14, 2022) offered a  constructing perspective , noting, “My children were not initially fond of traditional Pontic dishes, but their interest has grown.”

These statements highlight a potential decline in the transmission of culinary traditions. Nevertheless, they also suggest that, with encouragement and exposure, younger generations can develop an appreciation for traditional foods (TFs). Bourdieu [28] argues that food preferences and practices, being deeply embedded in social and cultural capital, play a key role in reinforcing cultural identity through their transmission.

Changes in cooking methods and ingredients

Several participants mentioned  the evolution of traditional Pontic recipes over time. As W03 noted (personal communication, July 6, 2022), “Some recipes have been modified for convenience with new cooking tools or ingredients.” Adding to this point , W11 (personal communication, September 12, 2022) expressed the opinion:

I believe that future generations will continue to prepare Pontic Greek cuisine delicacies, although they might substitute ingredients. For instance, they might use rice or pasta instead of korkota in tanomenon sorva.

Urbanization and its impact on traditional culinary practices

The influence of urbanization on culinary customs was evident in the transcripts. W08 observed that younger housewives living in urban settings  might be reluctant to prepare traditional dishes due to their complexity and potential mess. Similarly , interviewee W09  commenting  a potential discontinuity in culinary traditions in cities compared to villages. These observations indicate that urbanization makes it harder to preserve the traditional Pontic Greek culinary traditions. This is an issue that has been a subject of study among researchers [87,88,89].

Results from participant observation

Participant observation highlighted  the rich depth of Pontic Greek culinary traditions. The tools  used in the cooking process range from traditional implements like the rolling pin to more modern devices. Although the use of modern utensils was extensive, many aspects of the preparation retained their traditional character. Even with modern advancements, traditional cooking techniques, such as kneading dough by hand and baking thin sheets of dough on a heated iron plate (satz) (Fig. 5), are still practiced .

Fig. 5
figure 5

Baking a thin sheet of dough on an iron plate

The preparation sites carried a sense of history and continuity, as previous generations had cooked in those spaces. Throughout the process, there was a friendly and collaborative atmosphere that encouraged a stronger connection with the participants. Thematic analysis uncovered three key themes: Traditional Food Preparation and Recipes, Traditional Food Knowledge and Transmission, and Community and Togetherness.

Traditional food preparation and recipes

Traditional Pontic Greek delicacies like otia, makarina, siron, and trimman are explored, with detailed explanations of their preparation methods provided (Fig. 6). The process of making these delicacies is often intricate  and requires a good understanding and considerable skill. Figure 7 illustrates the step-by-step preparation process of makarina, a traditional handmade pasta. This aligns with  the complexity and richness of traditional recipes, which are integral to the culinary heritage. Sutton [20] emphasizes the significance of customary and detailed culinary practices in maintaining cultural continuity.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Four delicacies of Pontic Greek cuisine: A Trimman, B Siron, C Otia, and D Makarina

Fig. 7
figure 7

Four steps in the preparation of Makarina: A The dough is formed into a ball and prepared to be rolled out into a thin sheet., B The dough is rolled into a thin sheet using a rolling pin., C The thin sheet of dough is sliced into strips., D The strips of dough are laid out to dry for several days on clean sheets

Traditional food knowledge and transmission

Evidence of intergenerational food knowledge transmission, a recurring theme in the transcripts, is provided by the statement from participant WC02 (personal communication, September 22, 2022):

I have made makarina myself five times before, learning the process from my mother-in-law.

This statement reflects the importance of passing down culinary traditions and techniques from one generation to the next. The preservation of Pontic Greek gastronomy is  a prime example of this intergenerational knowledge transfer in action [2, 49].

Community and togetherness

The preparation of traditional dishes promotes a sense of community through shared experiences and collaborative efforts. For instance,  participant observation suggests that the preparation of makarina often involved active collaboration from both family members and neighbors (WC02). Similarly, the tradition of serving trimman to worshippers (WC04) and preparing otia for weddings highlights the role of food in community engagement. These examples  highlight how culinary practices can strengthen social bonds and reinforce community identity. The study by Chrysou-Karatza [2] on the Pontic Greek community in Attica similarly emphasized this role.

Overall, participant observation provided a rich and multi-dimensional view of Pontic Greek culinary traditions. The detailed insights into the cooking processes of the traditional delicacies showcased their socio-cultural context, emotional significance, and their role as a medium for preserving culinary traditions.

Merging of results

The mixed-methods study provides a comprehensive overview of the Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC) in the region of Western Macedonia, Greece. The quantitative data unveiled the sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics of the participants, as well as their preferences and consumption patterns regarding Pontic Greek delicacies. The qualitative data showed the cultural and emotional meanings of the Pontic culinary traditions, as well as the challenges and opportunities for their preservation and transmission.

The perspectives from the data sets were merged into convergent concepts and integrated in a joint display (Fig. 8), which illustrates the interplay of factors influencing Pontic Greek culinary traditions. These concepts included Generational Change and Traditional Food Knowledge Transmission, Preservation of Culinary Traditions, Urbanization Impact, Cuisine in Pontic Greek Identity, Traditional Cooking Methods, and Health Considerations. The main idea behind all convergent concepts is that the culinary traditions of Greeks of Pontic descent are dynamic and shaped by personal, cultural, environmental, and societal factors.

Fig. 8
figure 8

Factors driving the evolution of Pontic Greek culinary traditions

By combining quantitative and qualitative findings, the study emphasizes the resilience and adaptability of Pontic Greek culinary traditions in the face of modern challenges. The preservation of these traditions relies on balancing the maintenance of cultural heritage with adaptation to contemporary health concerns and lifestyle changes.

Discussion

This mixed-methods study investigated the dietary habits, preferences, and underlying motives of Pontic Greeks in the Western Macedonia region of Greece. This comprehensive approach provided insights into the cultural, emotional, and practical aspects of culinary traditions, as well as the sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics of the participants. Our findings suggest that culinary traditions emerge from a multidimensional interaction of personal, cultural, environmental, and societal factors. Age, education, and place of residence play a significant role in shaping food preferences, aligning with findings from previous research [90, 91].

From the perspective of cultural identity, cuisine is particularly significant for women, suggesting that food is a key factor in cultural identity and heritage. This observation is consistent with earlier studies [1, 25]. Traditional foods (TFs) and dishes, like pisia, tanomenon sorva, and chavitz remain popular, indicating a rich culinary heritage, as highlighted in a recent study  [70]. The prominence of these foods illustrates how cultural heritage continues to influence food choices [92].

Many Pontic Greeks value their TFs, with older generations pointing out changes in the quality of staple ingredients like flour and butter [93]. This perceived change is believed to alter the authentic taste of the food, illustrating the emotional connection and the importance of authenticity in their culinary heritage. The prominence of these foods illustrates how cultural heritage continues to influence food choices [47]. Furthermore, the shared preparation of food within Pontic Greek cuisine (PGC), along with its cultural and religious dimensions, fosters unity and a sense of belonging. This observation aligns with previous findings by Chrysou-Karatza [2] on Greeks of Pontic descent.

Although many respondents felt that Pontic Greek culinary traditions remain preserved, there is also evidence that these traditions are gradually changing. Urbanization and a growing disinterest in traditional culinary customs are hindering the transfer of traditional food knowledge (TFK) to younger generations. This decline in traditional cooking practices, particularly among young people, also s been documented in other parts of Greece [94]. In urban areas, there is a shift toward more industrialized food consumption patterns, though this trend is less evident in rural areas of Greece [95].

Health considerations also significantly impact the preparation of traditional foods. Participants preferred traditional Mediterranean staples, including olive oil, fresh salads, wild greens, and dairy products, known for their health benefits [96]. A key modification in traditional recipes is the substitution of butter with olive oil as a healthier alternative. Such modifications offer a promising path to healthier dietary goals if they satisfy consumer sensory expectations [97]. Greeks of Pontic origin consume significantly more olive oil daily than butter, a practice associated with a healthier lifestyle [98].

However, some participants expressed a strong desire to safeguard these traditions and continue to transmit them to younger generations. The preservation of culinary traditions plays a pivotal role in safeguarding cultural heritage and identity. Engaging younger generations in culinary traditions could be an effective way to maintain and transmit TFK. Initiatives to preserve these culinary traditions could include publishing cookbooks [70], conducting research [44], hosting culinary festivals [99], using social media [100], and supporting small-scale producers [1].

Although the research provides valuable insights, its scope is limited by a relatively small sample size and a focus on Western Macedonia. Future research could benefit from larger , more diverse populations, and employing in-depth ethnographic methods to further explore  the distinct elements of PGC.

Conclusion

This mixed-methods study provides an analytical examination of the Pontic Greek culinary traditions within the Western Macedonia region of Greece, marking their central role in shaping cultural identity and heritage. The findings confirm that Pontic Greeks still actively preserve traditional culinary practices, while quantitative and qualitative data highlight the importance of food as a key cultural marker for the community. Signature dishes like pisia and tanomenon sorva retain their popularity despite evolving dietary habits and urbanization pressures.

These traditional culinary practices, while valued, they are also evolving due to personal circumstances, health considerations, and social context. A generational shift and declining interest among younger generations further challenge the preservation of this cultural heritage. Nevertheless, the dynamic nature of the Pontic Greek culinary traditions and their adaptability show the resilience of the community in safeguarding and evolving its cultural practices.

The findings suggest that these traditions could promote local development and cultural tourism, showcasing the rich culinary heritage of the Pontic Greeks. Moreover, preserving these practices not only safeguards a unique cultural identity but also contributes to social cohesion, cultural diversity, and the sustainability of local food systems. Future research could expand this exploration to other regions with a Pontic Greek population to provide a comparative understanding of the factors influencing the preservation and evolution of their culinary traditions.

Availability of data and materials

Data and materials related to this study are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Abbreviations

FCM:

Food choice motives

FCQ:

Food choice questionnaire

FFQ:

Food frequency questionnaire

PGC:

Pontic Greek cuisine

REC-UOWM:

Research Ethics Committee of the University of Western Macedonia

TFK:

Traditional food knowledge

TFs:

Traditional foods

UOWM:

University of Western Macedonia

References

  1. Timothy DJ, Ron AS. Understanding heritage cuisines and tourism: identity, image, authenticity, and change. J Herit Tour. 2013;8:99–104. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1080/1743873X.2013.767818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chrysou-Karatza K. Trofes kai ethnotopiki tautotita ton Pontion sta Sourmena [Foods and ethno-regional identity among Pontians in Sourmena, Attica]. In: Sergis MG, editor. Pontus: folkore topics of Pontian Hellenism. Athens: Alithia Publications; 2008. p. 431–49.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sergis MG. Scholia stin erevna tis Proedrou k. Mavridou kai proektaseis [Review on the research of the Chair Mrs. Mavridou and its outcomes]. In: “Parakath’ ki Arothymias”: giortes politismou stin kardia tou therous. Thrylorio: Pontian Association of Pontics of Thrylorio "I Kerasounta kai to Gars"; 2018, p. 8–11.

  4. Vansina J. Oral tradition as history. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kaskamanidis I. Diapragmatefsi me to parelthon gia ton kathorismo tou parontos kai to schediasmo tou mellontos: i taftotita ton Elladiton Pontion kata ton 20o aiona [Negotiating with the past to define the present and plan the future: the identity of Pontic Greeks in the 20th century]. In: Sergis MG, editor. Pontus: folkore topics of Pontian Hellenism. Athens: Alithia Publications; 2008. p. 183–204.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Harris JR. The nurture assumption: why children turn out the way they do. New York: Free Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Whiting BB, Edwards CP. Children of different worlds: the formation of social behavior. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Swinbank VA. Women’s food matters: stirring the pot. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan; 2021.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Halbwachs M. On collective memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1992.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Lagoumitzi G. Narratives of trauma across generations of Pontic Greeks and their impact on national identity. In: Magliveras SS, editor. Agency and immigration policy. London: Transnational Press London; 2020. p. 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vergeti M. Syllogiki tautotita tou Pontiakou ellinismou sto elliniko kratos: to taxidi exi geneon se ekato chronia [Collective identity of Pontic Greeks in the Greek state: the journey of six generations in a hundred years]. In: Varvounis MG, Kakampoura R, Efstathiadou, (ed.) Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference on Folklore—Folk Tradition of Pontus: From the Past to the Present. 2019 November 29-December 1; Thessaloniki, Greece. Athens: Committee of Pontian Studies; 2021, p. 317–26.

  12. Bruneau M. The Pontic Greeks, from Pontus to the Caucasus, Greece and the diaspora “iconography” and mobile frontiers. J Alp Res Rev Géogr Alp. 2013. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.4000/rga.2092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dawkins RM. The Pontic dialect of modern Greek in Asia Minor and Russia. Trans Philol Soc. 1937;36:15–52. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1937.tb00672.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tsekouras I. Pastures of love, mountains of sacrifice: imaginings of Pontic homelands in parakathi singing and the postmemory of trauma. J Mod Greek Stud. 2022;40:395–423. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1353/mgs.2022.0027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pittas G. Alfavitari ellinikis gastronomias [Alphabet of Greek gastronomy]. Athens: Gastronomic Communities of Greece Civil Non-Profit Company; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Matthaiou A. Voyages, space, words: identity and representations of food in 19th-century Macedonia*. Earthly Delights, Brill; 2018, p. 459–77. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1163/9789004367548_018.

  17. Durazzo A. The close linkage between nutrition and environment through biodiversity and sustainability: local foods, traditional recipes, and sustainable diets. Sustain Sci Pract Policy. 2019;11:2876. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/su11102876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Durazzo A, Kiefer J, Lucarini M, Camilli E, Marconi S, Gabrielli P, et al. Qualitative analysis of traditional Italian dishes: FTIR approach. Sustain Sci Pract Policy. 2018;10:4112. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/su10114112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bell D, Valentine G. Consuming geographies: we are where we eat. London; New York: Routledge; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sutton DE. Remembrance of repasts: an anthropology of food and memory. Oxford: Berg; 2001.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Zouraris X. O defteros deipnosofistis [The second Deipnosophist]. Athens: Ikaros Publishing; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nitsiakos, V. Prosanatolismoi: mia kritiki eisagogi sti laografia [Perspectives: a critical introduction to folklore] (2nd). Athens: Kritiki S.A; 2014

  23. Di Giovine MA, Brulotte RL. Introduction food and foodways as cultural heritage. In: Brulotte RL, Di Giovine MA, editors. Edible identities: food as cultural heritage. 1st ed. London: Routledge; 2014. p. 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Grace T. Foodways and identity: narratives of life history told through family recipes. IU South Bend Undergrad Res J. 2019;19:3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fischler C. Food, self and identity. Soc Sci Inf. 1988;27:275–92. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1177/053901888027002005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gabaccia DR. We are what we eat: ethnic food and the making of Americans. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Douglas M. Deciphering a Meal. In: Counihan C, Van Esterik P, Julier A, (eds.) Food and culture: a reader. 4th ed., Fourth Edition. | New York : Routledge, 2018. | “Third Edition Published by Routledge 2013”—T.p. Verso.: Routledge; 2018, p. 29–47.

  28. Bourdieu P. Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Almansouri M, Verkerk R, Fogliano V, Luning PA. Exploration of heritage food concept. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2021;111:790–7. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.01.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Valamoti SM, Fyntikoglou V, Symponis K. Food crops in ancient Greek cuisine: an archaeobotanical and textual study. University Studio Press; 2022.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dalby A, Dalby R. Gifts of the gods: a history of food in Greece. London: Reaktion Books; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ball EL. Greek food after mousaka: cookbooks, “local” culture, and the Cretan diet. J Mod Greek Stud. 2003;21:1–36. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1353/mgs.2003.0003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Epikouros. I nea elliniki kouzina: peri ellinikotitas tou mousaka, tis gastronomikis mas tautotitas kai tis ananeosis tis [The new Greek cuisine: On the Greekness of moussaka, our gastronomic identity and its renewal]. Athens: Ikaros Publishing; 2012.

  34. Kafatos A, Verhagen H, Moschandreas J, Apostolaki I, Van Westerop JJM. Mediterranean diet of Crete. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000;100:1487–93. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/S0002-8223(00)00416-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Allbaugh LG. Crete: a case study of an underdeveloped area. Princeton: Princeton Legacy Library; 1953.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. Marakis G, Gaitis F, Mila S, Papadimitriou D, Tsigarida E, Mousia Z, et al. Attitudes towards olive oil usage, domestic storage, and knowledge of quality: a consumers’ survey in Greece. Nutrients. 2021. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/nu13113709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martimianaki G, Peppa E, Valanou E, Papatesta EM, Klinaki E, Trichopoulou A. Today’s Mediterranean diet in Greece: findings from the national health and nutrition survey—HYDRIA (2013–2014). Nutrients. 2022;14:1193. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/nu14061193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Epikouros. Ti einai i elliniki kouzina; [What is Greek cuisine?]. Εf Zin, 2004:124–6.

  39. Giotis A. Edesmatologion ipeirou [Menu of Epirus]. Athens: Ellinika Grammata; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Giralea S. I techni tis pitas: Paradosiakes syntages dytikis makedonias [The art of making pies: traditional recipes of Western Macedonia]. Athens: Patakis Publishers; 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Delatolla-Foskolou N. Kykladon gefseis [Cycladic flavors]. Self Publication; 2006.

  42. Barmparigou A, Papalazarou A. Apo stoma se stoma: thisavroi tis ellinikis kouzinas [By word of mouth: treasures of Greek cuisine]. Athens: Stamoulis Publications S.A; 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Miari A. Yiayia: time-perfected recipes from Greece’s grandmothers. London: Hardie Grant Books; 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jia Z, Zhang B, Sharma A, Kim NS, Purohit SM, Green MM, et al. Revelation of the sciences of traditional foods. Food Control. 2023;145:109392. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Zouraris, X. Kouzina kai politismos: i enotita kai i polytypia tis ellinikis kouzinas [Cuisine and culture: the unity and diversity of Greek cuisine]. Seven Days-Greek Cuisine, 1998:2–4.

  46. Poulain J-P. The sociology of food: eating and the place of food in society. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Timothy DJ, editor. Heritage cuisines: traditions, identities and tourism. London: Routledge; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tsichlias SN. Agna efaisamen sas [We fed you with authentic tastes]. Gastronomos. 2013;81:1.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Taxidis S. Opseis tis kathimerinis zois stin Tsimera kata to telos tou 19ou aiona kai tis arches tou 20ou aiona [Views of everyday life at Tsimera at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century]. In: Sergis MG, editor. Pontus: folkore topics of Pontian Hellenism. Athens: Alithia Publications; 2008. p. 391–406.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kontoeidis, A. M. I alieia ston Ponto [Fishing in Pontus]. In: A’ symposio pontiakis laographias [1st symposium of Pontic folklore]. Athens: Committee for Pontian Studies; 1984, p. 493–8.

  51. Bozi S. O geustikos politismos ton Romion tis Polis kai tis Mikras Asias [The culinary culture of the Greeks of Constantinople and Asia Minor]. Athens: Topos and Soula Bozi Publications; 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Makridou-Kalliga A. I pontiaki mageiriki [The Pontic cuisine]. In: A’ symposio pontiakis laographias [1st symposium of Pontic folklore]. Athens: Committee for Pontian Studies; 1984, p. 546–8.

  53. Zoellner J, Harris JE. Mixed-methods research in nutrition and dietetics. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017;117:683–97. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.jand.2017.01.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Devine S, Brett J. Research Ethics in Food Studies. In: Chrzan J, Brett J, editors. Food research: nutritional anthropology and archaeological methods. New York: Berghahn; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rowley J. Designing and using research questionnaires. Manag Res Rev. 2014;37:308–30. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1108/MRR-02-2013-0027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Tomaszewski LE, Zarestky J, Gonzalez E. Planning qualitative research: design and decision making for new researchers. Int J Qual Methods. 2020;19:160940692096717. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1177/1609406920967174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Leavy P. Research design: quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. New York; London: Guilford Press; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Chrzan J, Brett J, Paxson H, editors. Participant-observation and interviewing techniques. Food culture: anthropology, linguistics and food studies. 1st ed. New York: Berghahn Books; 2017. p. 92–100.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pelagidis E. I apokatastasi ton prosfygon sti Dytiki Makedonia: 1923–1930 [The rehabilitation of refugees in Western Macedonia: 1923–1930] [Doctoral thesis]. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Sarker M, Al-Muaalemi MA. Sampling techniques for quantitative research. In: Islam MR, Khan NA, Baikady R, editors. Principles of social research methodology. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2022. p. 221–34.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  61. Uakarn C, Chaokromthong K, Sintao N. Sample size estimation using Yamane and Cochran and Krejcie and Morgan and Green formulas and Cohen statistical power analysis by G*power and comparisions. APHEIT Int J. 2021;10:76–86.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res. 2015;42:533–44. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Lofland J, Snow DA, Anderson L, Lofland LH. Analyzing social settings: a guide to qualitative observation and analysis. 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000;39:124–30. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP, Warner U. Sociodemographic questionnaire modules for comparative social surveys. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2018.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  66. Vergeti M. I syllogiki taftotita tou pontiakou Ellinismou ston Elladiko choro [Collective identity of the Pontian Greeks in Greece]. In: Sergis MG, editor. Pontus: folkore topics of Pontian Hellenism. Athens: Alithia Publications; 2008. p. 105–13.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Galanidou-Balfousia E. Pontiaki laografia: Oi 4 epoches kai oi mines tous [Pontian folklore: the 4 seasons and their months]. Athens: Committee for Pontian Studies; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Bountziouka V, Bathrellou E, Giotopoulou A, Katsagoni C, Bonou M, Vallianou N, et al. Development, repeatability and validity regarding energy and macronutrient intake of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire: methodological considerations. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2012;22:659–67. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.numecd.2010.10.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Haq AS, Karkeck JM. Customizing a food frequency questionnaire to the needs of a specific ethnic group for increased accuracy in dietary intake assessment. J Am Diet Assoc. 1998;98:A50. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/S0002-8223(98)00486-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Keramaris A, Kasapidou E, Mitlianga P. Pontic Greek cuisine: the most common foods, ingredients, and dishes presented in cookbooks and folklore literature. J Ethn Foods. 2022;9:1–18. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s42779-022-00117-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Imellos SD, Polymerou KA. Paradosiakos ylikos vios tou ellinikou laou: Erotimatologio [Traditional material life of the Greek people: questionnaire]. Athens: Academy of Athens Hellenic Folklore Research Centre; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Onwezen MC, Reinders MJ, Verain MCD, Snoek HM. The development of a single-item food choice questionnaire. Food Qual Prefer. 2019;71:34–45. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Shakir DM, Rahman DA. Conducting pilot study in a qualitative inquiry: learning some useful lessons. J Posit Sch Psychol. 2022;6:1620–4.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Dodds S, Hess AC. Adapting research methodology during COVID-19: lessons for transformative service research. J Serv Manag. 2020. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1108/JOSM-05-2020-0153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Basil M. Use of photography and video in observational research. J Cetacean Res Manag. 2011;14:246–57. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1108/13522751111137488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Friese S. Qualitative data analysis with Atlas.ti. London: Sage; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  78. Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48:2134–56. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/1475-6773.12117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Fetters MD, Tajima C. Joint displays of integrated data collection in mixed methods research. Int J Qual Method. 2022;21:160940692211045. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1177/16094069221104564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Bessiere J. Local development and heritage: traditional food and cuisine as tourist attractions in rural areas. Sociol Ruralis. 1998;38:21–34. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/1467-9523.00061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Lupton D. Food, memory and meaning: the symbolic and social nature of food events. Sociol Rev. 1994;42:664–85. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1994.tb00105.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Holtzman JD. Food and memory. Annu Rev Anthropol. 2006;35:361–78. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Skalkos D, Kalyva ZC, Kosma IS. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on college students’ food choice motives in Greece. Sustain Sci Pract Policy. 2023;15:9865. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/su15139865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Juzwiak CR, Juzwiak T, Juzwiak VR. From potato to rice and beans: memory and polish culinary tradition throughout three generations. Anthropol Food. 2018. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.4000/aof.9142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Sharif MS, Zahari MSM, Nor N, Muhammad R. The importance of knowledge transmission and its relation towards the Malay traditional food practice continuity. Proc Soc Behav Sci. 2016;222:567–77. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Krystallis A, Ness M. Motivational and cognitive structures of Greek consumers in the purchase of quality food products. J Int Consum Mark. 2004;16:7–36. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1300/J046v16n02_02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Drewnowski A, Popkin BM. The nutrition transition: new trends in the global diet. Nutr Rev. 1997;55:31–43. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/j.1753-4887.1997.tb01593.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Chatzivagia E, Pepa A, Vlassopoulos A, Malisova O, Filippou K, Kapsokefalou M. Nutrition transition in the post-economic crisis of Greece: assessing the nutritional gap of food-insecure individuals. Cross-Sect Stud Nutr. 2019;11:2914. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/nu11122914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Dokova KG, Pancheva RZ, Usheva NV, Haralanova GA, Nikolova SP, Kostadinova TI, et al. Nutrition transition in Europe: east-west dimensions in the last 30 years—a narrative review. Front Nutr. 2022. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fnut.2022.919112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Kostakis I, Paparas D, Saiti A, Papadaki S. Food consumption within Greek households: further evidence from a national representative sample. Econ Soc. 2020;8:17. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/economies8010017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Bountziouka V, Tsiotas K, Economou H, Naska A, Trichopoulou A. Trends in food availability in GREECE—the DAFNE V project 2008. https://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_projects/2003/action1/docs/greece_en.pdf (Accessed 8 July 2023).

  92. Kapelari S, Alexopoulos G, Moussouri T, Sagmeister KJ, Stampfer F. Food heritage makes a difference: the importance of cultural knowledge for improving education for sustainable food choices. Sustain Sci Pract Policy. 2020;12:1509. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/su12041509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Paradeisopoulou P. Diadromes entaxis kai diamorfosis tis taftotitas ton Pontion prosfygon [Assimilation processes and identity formation of Pontic Greek refugees] [Doctoral thesis]. Athens: Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Sutton DE. Secrets from the Greek kitchen: cooking, skill, and everyday life on an Aegean Island. Oakland, California: University of California Press; 2014.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  95. Gikas G, Hyz A, Vasileiou K, Georgakopoulos G, Sotiropoulos I. Urban and rural dietary patterns in Greece in the years 1957–2008; an economic analysis. Probl World Agric (Probl Rol Światowego). 2012. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.22004/AG.ECON.195281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P. Healthy traditional Mediterranean diet: an expression of culture, history, and lifestyle. Nutr Rev. 1997;55:383–9. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/j.1753-4887.1997.tb01578.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Chauhan J. Taste discrimination of traditional and “health” modified recipes. J R Soc Health. 1989;109:39–41. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1177/146642408910900201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Gaforio JJ, Visioli F, Alarcón-de-la-Lastra C, Castañer O, Delgado-Rodríguez M, Fitó M, et al. Virgin olive oil and health: summary of the III international conference on virgin olive oil and health consensus report, JAEN (Spain) 2018. Nutrients. 2019. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/nu11092039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Timothy D, Pena M. Food festivals and heritage awareness. Heritage Cuisines: Taylor and Francis; 2016. p. 149–65.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Widjanarko W, Lusiana Y, Marhaeni DP, Widodo B. The utilization of social media as traditional culinary documentation in strengthening local tourism: a study on an instagram account of @dinporabudpar_banyumas. In: Firmansyah DB, Muttaqin U, Dhyaningrum A, Prasetyoningsih TWS, (eds.) Proceedings of the international conference on academia-based tourism revival 2022 (ABTR 2022), vol. 738, Paris: Atlantis Press SARL; 2023, pp 251–7

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their sincere thanks to the participants who devoted their time to this study. Additionally, they are deeply appreciative of the support provided by members of some Pontic cultural associations in the region of Western Macedonia.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paraskevi Mitlianga.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The research protocol for this study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC-UOWM) of the University of Western Macedonia (REC-UOWM: 11/05–03-2021). All participants provided their informed consent in writing prior to their participation in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keramaris, A., Kasapidou, E. & Mitlianga, P. Savoring the past, preserving the future: a mixed-methods examination of culinary traditions among Pontic Greeks in Northern Greece. J. Ethn. Food 12, 5 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s42779-025-00265-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s42779-025-00265-7

Keywords