Early Christian art contains frequent depictions of Jews but rarely gives them any distinctive Jewish features. Then, around the year 1000, Jews begin to appear in European art with pointy hats, beards, and (later) big noses. In Dark Mirror, Sara Lipton argues that the shifting portrayal of Jews reflected changes in Christian attitudes, as Bernard Starr writes in a review:

Jews were included in [early] Christian art “as witnesses” to show their blindness to the divinity of Jesus. The appearance of these Jewish witnesses also confirmed the superiority of Christianity by displaying the defeated lowly status of the scattered and “pathetic” Diaspora Jews—who were forced to scatter as God’s punishment for their blindness. . . .

Both the pointed hat and the beard were artistic inventions for identifying Jews in artworks. Lipton informs us that headwear was commonly used in medieval paintings to indicate rank or station in life. Popes were pictured with tiaras, kings with crowns, and soldiers with helmets. Since Jews had no distinctive headwear to identify them, artists invented the Jewish hat.

[Yet] apart from Jews “witnessing” in these paintings, there was no anti-Semitism or demonization of Jews in 11th- and early-12th-century medieval Christian artworks, Lipton confirms. That took a sharp turn by the mid-12th century, when Jews began to be demonized as enemies of Christianity. That was the beginning of Jews becoming, in Lipton’s words, “the most powerful and poisonous symbol in all of Christian art.”

On Monday night, the IDF struck a group of Hamas operatives near the Nasser hospital in Khan Yunis, the main city in southern Gaza. The very fact of this attack was reassuring, as it suggested that the release of Edan Alexander didn’t come with restraints on Israeli military activity. Then, yesterday afternoon, Israeli jets carried out another, larger attack on Khan Yunis, hitting a site where it believed Mohammad Sinwar, the head of Hamas in Gaza, to be hiding. The IDF has not yet confirmed that he was present. There is some hope that the death of Sinwar—who replaced his older brother Yahya after he was killed last year—could have a debilitating effect on Hamas.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is visiting the Persian Gulf, and it’s unclear how his diplomatic efforts there will affect Israel, its war with Hamas, and Iran. For its part, Jerusalem has committed to resume full-scale operations in Gaza after President Trump returns to the U.S. But, Gabi Simoni and Erez Winner explain, Israel does not have unlimited time to defeat Hamas:

Israel faces persistent security challenges across multiple fronts—Iran, the West Bank, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon—all demanding significant military resources, especially during periods of escalation. . . . Failing to achieve a decisive victory not only prolongs the conflict but also drains national resources and threatens Israel’s ability to obtain its strategic goals.

Only a swift, forceful military campaign can achieve the war’s objectives: securing the hostages’ release, ensuring Israeli citizens’ safety, and preventing future kidnappings. Avoiding such action won’t just prolong the suffering of the hostages and deepen public uncertainty—it will also drain national resources and weaken Israel’s standing in the region and beyond.

We recommend launching an intense military operation in Gaza without delay, with clear, measurable objectives—crippling Hamas’s military and governance capabilities and securing the release of hostages. Such a campaign should combine military pressure with indirect negotiations, maximizing the chances of a successful outcome while minimizing risks.

Crucially, the operation must be closely coordinated with the United States and moderate Arab states to reduce international pressure and preserve the gains of regional alliances.