The Lavish Roman Banquet: A Calculated Display Of Debauchery And Power

The norm was not perpetual famine but neither was the average peasant well fed except in transitory times of abundance. Normally the nobility and urban patriciate and cash rich populations like successful merchants would survive famines just fine though food would get more expensive. For the mass of the population lean years where the old, sick or young would die for lack of food would be every five years if they were lucky and about every thirty years a tenth to a third of the population would die in a famine.

The unusual thing about the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s wasn’t that 1/4 of the population died; it was that that was the last time it happened. Famines were so unremarkable before the 1800s, even in Western Europe, that we often need to do archival detective work to figure out they happened. Do we see more people buried in paupers’ graves at this time? Do tree ring data suggest unusually harsh weather? Did grain prices rise? The literate classes weren’t indifferent to the suffering of those on the Malthusian margin of survival but large portions of the population dying of starvation every so often was normal.

Yes, you're making a good point. Traditional societies that have lasted many generations are usually pretty good to excellent at knowing how to provide enough good food and clean water for themselves. That said, there are many people still alive who got enough food and grew up healthy, but recall always wanting to eat more as they grew up. People who are in this state are particularly affected by rewards of food.

Also, I'm not sure if Celtic societies had peasants organized like those of medieval Europe. Celtic people lived in both dispersed rural environments and in cities. There was considerable trade. The common view is that people just tended to live in the community they grew up, but that people were free otherwise. Social stratification is said to have increased over time, and perhaps things would have ended up in the same place anyhow, without the Romans. The Celts also practiced slavery, like the Romans.

Yes, they had simple diets, but not bad ones.

This can vary quite a bit in times of migration and transition.

I suspect that some nobles had someone of a lower status they actively disliked. The strategy of most persons of lower status would be to not be noticed. It follows that there would be some people who would be noticed, and that sometimes, it would be in a bad way. Even in societies where the lords were obliged to feed everyone, I doubt this would prevent them from conferring favors by degree.

I recall one Roman description of a Gallic feast where it's suggested that boasting and fighting between guests would occasionally occur, and that this was regarded as one form of entertainment. (The propaganda purpose behind this, being to portray the Gauls as barbarians who would benefit from being civilized by the Romans.) As a modern person, I have a hard time understanding how, occasionally at least, this wouldn't get someone dis-invited.