By the late 17th century, thanks to Spain’s extensive contact with Central and South Americans, chocolate had become a delicacy enjoyed by the wealthy. So much so, writes Orge Castellano, that King Charles II and his courtiers “sipped chocolate while watching conversos accused of being Judaizers be burned at stake.” But the descendants of converted Jews, some of whom had returned to Judaism, would also play a crucial role in turning the food into a popular treat throughout Europe and North America. Castellano writes:

The vast networks of Sephardi Jews living in the Caribbean would become reputable manufacturers par excellence and the largest exporters of cacao. Jews would learn from Native Americans how to process cacao according to their customs. Early involvement in the harvesting and developing of vanilla refineries and rum distilleries meant the Jews settled in the colonies had an advantage not only in the harvesting process of chocolate but also in its manufacturing.

Benjamin d’Acosta de Andrade, a Dutch West India Company shareholder, was one of these new settlers. Originally from Bayonne [in southern France], this converso, who most probably had been born in Portugal, farmed cocoa trees on the French Caribbean island of Martinique around the 1660s. The entrepreneur, who later converted back to Judaism in [Dutch-ruled] Brazil, created the first cacao-processing factory in French territory, opened the first synagogue in 1676, and owned two of the largest sugarcane plantations in the region.

D’Acosta was but one among many. Nor was the Jewish involvement in the chocolate trade limited to Sephardi or Caribbean Jews:

Levy Solomons—a native of Montreal who lived in Albany, New York, and manufactured and sold tobacco, snuff, and chocolate—was another essential North American Jewish trader in the 1790s. His factory supplied chocolate for hot drinks to Dutch customers. Simon and Hyman Gratz from Philadelphia had a successful business with Brazil, importing as much as 15,000 pounds of cocoa from Santo Domingo.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.