Living as a non-wealthy person in ancient Rome how confident could I be that I would not starve as long as I had a trade?

by Dinocrocodile

Hearing of grain shortages (and subsidies), and poor harvests and plagues with catastrophic results on the economy it seems as though there would not necessarily be a guarantee that next year, or the year after, there would be grain to buy at the market or at least at an affordable price?

How secure would my food supply be if I did not own crop-bearing land or participate in trade directly? Would starvation be a concern for the most extreme situations or more of a fact of life?

XenophonTheAthenian

as long as I had a trade?

So, a skilled worker? A skilled worker would not starve. The majority of the urban population in the Roman world consisted of unskilled day-workers, who eked out a rather meager existence picking up what employment they could on a daily basis, generally for very little pay (and none whatsoever if they could find no work that day). Garnsey states that even during food crises actual mass starvation was uncommon, but even if the city was generally free from starvation many of its inhabitants were generally chronically malnourished. State-subsidized gain was generally just enough to feed an individual (although with little variety), but it was totally inadequate for even a small family, necessitating the purchase of more grain on the market. As such even an unskilled laborer could survive, at least provided he was included in the state subsidies--following Augustus' total reorganization of the cura annonae state subsidized grain became the exclusive privilege of a relatively small group, who passed on this right to their progeny regardless of need.

Most urban dwellers needed, then, to purchase additional grain on the market. The danger during food crises was not one of actual lack of food, but of availability. Roman Italy could call on not only its own produce but the produce of the entire Mediterranean world. Even if the city were cut off from its provincial grain supply (as in the 60s when the pirates cut off the trade routes to Sicily, Sardinia, and Africa) there was still enough grain to feed the people of Rome and Italy. But in the event of any disruption to the food supply prices would soar, and in a pre-Green Revolution agricultural economy, in which it might not be clear when the disruption (natural or man-made) would end, prices could remain high for some time. Legislation in the Principate regulating control of the flow of grain and imposing limitations on suppliers' ability to hike up prices helped both to maintain a stable grain supply and stable prices, but Mother Nature did not always play fair, and even then sometimes unexpected shortage could occur.

However, a skilled worker was not his unskilled counterpart. Skilled tradesmen did not have to rely on the ever-changing, irregular daily job market. Rather than searching daily for whatever unskilled work he could find, the skilled tradesmen was secure in his trade. He was not even moderately wealthy, unless he had the extremely good fortune to own a massive workshop, but he was not abjectly poor. The skilled worker had something of a buffer to his finances, since his workshop or shop provided a steady source of income that, no matter how small it was, he could rely on always to be there. The skilled worker, therefore, as a member of the so-called plebs media, could afford permanent lodgings, a little more variety in his diet, a few slaves or hired subordinates, and even to take a day off here and there (particularly if he had other workers to watch his shop) to vote or participate in political activity. It was unlikely that there would literally not be food to eat, but prices might rise significantly. But whereas the food available might be well outside the means of an unskilled day worker a skilled tradesman would at least be able always to afford what was available for himself and his family.