[retrac]

From what I have read the diet of people in classical antiquity was only terrible for the very poor. Most people in ancient Rome got to, at least rarely, eat honey cakes and fresh fruit and dried fish and maybe once a year at festivals even a small chunk of meat. They grew chives, dill, garlic, asparagus, radish, parsley, thyme, mustard, cumin and many other spices. And they made vinegar and olive oil and garum (fermented fish sauce) on an industrial scale. Mostly these would be used as sparing garnish to the grain-centric diet. But usually present.

[grebc]

The very poor far outnumber the wealthy.

[IAmBroom]

False dichotomy. There exist the somewhat-poor through middle class.

[bobthepanda]

one thing to note is that while they may have consumed it they probably weren't making it. Particularly for urban dwellers, kitchens were very rudimentary if you even had one.

[IAmBroom]

Pretty much every castle, house, and hovel had a firesource, and cooking was centered around it.

[bobthepanda]

Ancient poor Romans did not have kitchens, both for space reasons (Ancient Rome had a million people in it in a fairly tight spot) and for fire risk. https://liisaeyerly.com/2025/10/22/poor-vs-wealthy-dining-in...

Similarly, poor people in Victorian England often ate out or ate cold meals, either because they did not have the means to cook, or because they could not afford to; pots were not really cheap, nor was cooking fuel. https://victorianweb.org/science/health/health8.html

Certain types of implements, like ovens, were not super practical or cheap for a lot of people to have dedicated to their own house. https://food52.com/story/17568-the-centuries-old-form-of-pub...