New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Noodling the Noodles

It took thousands of years to go from mush to spaghetti

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


FOOD HISTORIAN FRANCINE SEGAN asserts that pasta emerged more than 5,000 years ago when an enterprising chef happened upon the now seemingly obvious idea of mushing flour and water together to create something that looked surprisingly like lasagna. “It breaks my heart to tell you this,” says Segan, invoking her own Italian heritage, “but the first to make those noodles might have been the ancient Greeks. Lots of references in ancient Greek writing—even in 3,000 B.C.—talk about layers that sound a lot like lasagna.”

Spaghetti took longer but appears to have taken shape in Italy. A popular misconception has Marco Polo introducing Italians to pasta when he returned from China in 1295, but Italy already had pasta by then. “In Sicily there is a town called Trabia,” wrote Arab geographer Muhammad al-Idrisi in 1154. “In this town they made a food of flour in the form of strings.” He describes a true pasta industry: foodstuffs were first dried in the sun and then shipped by boat to other regions of Italy and even other countries.

A few hundred years later Leonardo da Vinci invented a machine that turned dough into edible strings. Technical glitches kept his pasta maker from achieving the mechanization of the industry he had hoped for. Still, the Italians succeeded in refining the art of pasta making, crafting more elaborate forms of mushed dough than anyone else.

Mike May is a freelance writer and editor based in Bradenton, Fla.

More by Mike May
Scientific American Magazine Vol 303 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Noodling the Noodles” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 303 No. 2 (), p. 53
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0810-53c

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe