Earliest hospital ?

[Scylax]

We read that a pre-Norman hospital site has been found...possibly 10th. century. This
is reported as the earliest evidence of such a structure in the UK. I beg to differ. In the
huge legionary Roman Fortress at Isca Silurum (Caerleon) there was a huge building, a
valetudinarium, or hospital for the 2nd. Augustan legion garrisoned there, and probably
used also for residents of the adjoining viccus. This building, where now stands Backall St.
was approximately the area of the nearby amphitheatre.. The Fortress dates from the 2nd . century A.D. It may even be the case that the earlier fortresses at Exeter and Usk had similar valetudinaria. Any further comments ?

[jno]

maybe the Roman ones were just for the military

http://www.romanarmyt...?f=17&t=30443&start=0

[Mosaic]

Roman temples also acted as centres of healing, on a variety of levels. Perhaps the media have slightly bolloxed the reporting, the significance being either that this recent discovery is the earliest post-Roman example, or earliest hospital attached to a monastery?

[Scylax]

Yes, Mosaic, I suspect that the reporter hasn't done his homework, and rushed into print with a rather flawed 'scoop'.
Roman temples dedicated to Aescalapius, Hygiae and Sula come to mind as obvious temples of healing, as at Aqua Sulis (Bath).
It would be odd to think that Isca Silurum was unique in having a valetudinarium, and not
Eboricum or Deva, for example.
Then, as you say, there were many early Christian monasteries, with small infirmaries.

[jno]

all the reports I read said the same thing so I suspect the claim was made by the archaeologists rather than the reporters. As was mentioned in the link I gave, it may be that this was the first hospital for civilians - ie a place for ordinary people to go if they were sick - rather than a special facility for soldiers.

[Scylax]

Yes, I take your point, jno, though I'm still inclined to think that civilians would be treated in the hospitals within the walls of the fortresses. Before the 4th. century, legionary soldiers were allowed to have their wives, families and slaves living with them in their
barracks, or conterbernia. I can't see the soldiers, much less their senior officers denying their families the services of a huge hospital on site, when they were ill.
Legionary fortresses were rarely fully manned - why then the huge hospitals for a reduced garrison of very fit, young soldiery ? Civilians freely used the other facilities
eg. the baths, taverns and amphitheatres; why not the hospitals ?