Though Hans Christian Andersen considered himself a serious novelist and dramatist, he is best known for his fairy tales, which include such classics as “The Little Mermaid,” “The Ugly Duckling”, “The Steadfast Tin Soldier,” and “The Red Shoes.” By and large, these are morality tales, informed by the Danish author’s Christian beliefs. But as Saul Jay Singer notes, Andersen’s work was also influenced by his encounters with Jewish life in Denmark:

Andersen had deep affection for the Jewish people; he was very familiar with Jewish tradition and culture; Jews and Jewish issues played an important role in many of his works; and he maintained very close relationships with Jews and with the Jewish community.

The early 19th century marked a dramatic turn for Danish Jews, particularly in 1819, when King Frederick VI instituted several reforms recognizing Jewish civil rights. Nonetheless, there were brutal anti-Semitic riots in Copenhagen that, ironically, commenced with the arrival of the then-fourteen-year-old Andersen. Revolted by the hatred and cruelty of his own countrymen, the events of that day remained with him throughout his life, and thus began his great sympathy and affection for the Jewish people.

In Andersen’s Cinderella-like “The Jewish Girl,” the noble and embattled heroine, Sarah, becomes convinced of the truth of Christianity when she is sent to a Christian school. But Sarah refuses to convert out of loyalty to and love for her parents—even after their deaths. Singer suggests that this complicated story reflects Andersen’s own experience as a Christian attending a Jewish school:

It is intriguing to note the similarities of the story to Andersen’s life. He had tender memories of the Jewish school he attended in Odense after he was beaten by a teacher at a state school. He left the Jewish school only because it closed in 1811, and years later, after he had already achieved fame, he wrote a letter of gratitude to Fedder Carstens, the headmaster of the school.

The experience of being an outsider who was treated so well by the Jewish school made an indelible impression on him and was an important factor in his becoming a passionate defender of the Jewish people. Some commentators contend that Andersen’s experience at the Jewish school as “a stranger in a strange land” was, at least in part, the genesis for “The Ugly Duckling” (1843), who so desperately wants to be beautiful and fit in with everyone else. Finally, the young author fancied a young Jewish girl named—wait for it—Sarah Heimann who, ironically, broke off the relationship because she thought he was too wrapped up in his world of stories and fantasies.

Surveying news websites and social media on Sunday morning, I immediately found some intelligent and well-informed observers arguing that Iran deliberately warned the U.S. of its pending assault on Israel, and calibrated it so that there would be few casualties and minimal destructiveness, thus hoping to avoid major retaliation. In other words, this massive barrage was a face-saving gesture by the ayatollahs. Others disagreed. Brian Carter and Frederick W. Kagan put the issue to rest:

The Iranian April 13 missile-drone attack on Israel was very likely intended to cause significant damage below the threshold that would trigger a massive Israeli response. The attack was designed to succeed, not to fail. The strike package was modeled on those the Russians have used repeatedly against Ukraine to great effect. The attack caused more limited damage than intended likely because the Iranians underestimated the tremendous advantages Israel has in defending against such strikes compared with Ukraine.

But that isn’t to say that Tehran achieved nothing:

The lessons that Iran will draw from this attack will allow it to build more successful strike packages in the future. The attack probably helped Iran identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of the Israeli air-defense system. Iran will likely also share the lessons it learned in this attack with Russia.

Iran’s ability to penetrate Israeli air defenses with even a small number of large ballistic missiles presents serious security concerns for Israel. The only Iranian missiles that got through hit an Israeli military base, limiting the damage, but a future strike in which several ballistic missiles penetrate Israeli air defenses and hit Tel Aviv or Haifa could cause significant civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure, including ports and energy. . . . Israel and its partners should not emerge from this successful defense with any sense of complacency.