Advanced a few weeks after the discovery by Professor Norman Golb (University of Chicago, U.S.A.), it was bitterly defended by its author.
- It is based above all on the discovery of Prof. Golb according to which Rouen was a great Jewish intellectual center during the Middle Ages. The arrival of many Jewish scientists could be explained only by the presence of a school.
- the lower part would be the library (as in the cistercian abbeys).
- the large room on the first floor would be the room of the class. The pupils would assemble the books for the study there.
- There would be at least an additional stage for a specialist class.
- graffiti referring to the temple of Jerusalem could apply only to a school.
- the building cannot be a synagogue, a text (XIXth century) locating the latter to another part of the district.
One can however object:
- We do not know of a medieval Jewish school. This leads us to think the contrary that the schools were in the synagogues (like the school in the Christian cathedrals and schools in the mosque). The term of school (Schule in Yiddish) is still used to speak about the synagogue.
- the great Jewish intellectual working life starts from the middle of the XIIth century, fifty years after the construction of the Monument.
- the lower part appears at the very least contra-indicated for the conservation of books (moisture, presence of a kitchen, dangers
due to the proximity of the door.).
- It is difficult to imagine frequent displacements of schoolboys (especially encumbered with large books!), in a small forty centimetres broad staircase.
- the use of graffiti is prone to criticism for they are not dated.
- the monument shows the same characteristics as houses found elsewhere in the city (for example on the other side of the Street of the Jews).
Other assumptions :SYNAGOGUE HOUSE