Лизет Модел (Lisette Model) (1901-1983). Хотела стать певицей и пианисткой, а стала гениальным фотографом. Всю жизнь учила фотографии других. Никогда не фотографируй то, что тебе не интересно . На всех ее фотографиях видно ее глубокое эмоциональное взаимодействие с объектом съемки.…

The Metis people are the founding people of Manitoba, and their culture is a fascinating mix of European and Native traditions - like fiddling and jigging.

Tankers!!! Ladies and Gents... Today we will know one of the most mortiferous tanks of his time: the Sd.Kfz. 161. Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV) Ausf F2. The German answer to powerfulls Matildas, T-34's and the heavy KV-1. Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV) Ausf F2 - SdKfz 161 History: The Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV), commonly known as the Panzer IV, was a German medium tank developed in the late 1930s and used extensively during the Second World War. Its ordnance inventory designation was Sd.Kfz. 161. Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV) Ausf F2 Russian front - 1942 The Panzer IV was the most widely manufactured German tank of the Second World War, with some 8,500 built. The Panzer IV was used as the base for many other fighting vehicles, including the Sturmgeschütz IV assault gun, Jagdpanzer IV tank destroyer, the Wirbelwind self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, and the Brummbär self-propelled gun. Sturmgeschütz IV assault gun Jagdpanzer IV tank destroyer Wirbelwind self-propelled anti-aircraft gun Brummbär self-propelled gun The tank saw service in all combat theaters involving Germany and was the only German tank to remain in continuous production throughout the war. Upgrades and design modifications, intended to counter new threats, extended its service life. Generally, these involved increasing the Panzer IV's armor protection or upgrading its weapons, although during the last months of the war, with Germany's pressing need for rapid replacement of losses, design changes also included simplifications to speed up the manufacturing process. The Panzer IV was partially succeeded by the Panther medium tank, which was introduced to counter the Soviet T-34, although the Panzer IV continued as a significant component of German armoured formations to the end of the war. Panther tank T-34 russian tanks The Panzer IV was the most widely exported tank in German service, with around 300 sold to Finland, Romania, Spain and Bulgaria. After the war, Syria procured Panzer IVs from France and Czechoslovakia, which saw combat in the 1967 Six-Day War. Captured Syrian Panzer IV - Six-Day War Israeli Latrun Tank Museum Circa 8,553 Panzer IVs of all versions were built during World War II, with only the StuG III assault-gun/tank destroyer's 10,086 vehicle production run exceeding the Panzer IV's total among Axis armored forces. Stug III Ausf B The Panzer IV was the brainchild of the German general and innovative armored warfare theorist Heinz Guderian. In concept, it was intended to be a support tank for use against enemy anti-tank guns and fortifications. Ideally, each tank battalion in a panzer division was to have three medium companies of Panzer IIIs and one heavy company of Panzer IVs. Panzer III Ausf N On 11 January 1934, the German army wrote the specifications for a "medium tractor", and issued them to a number of defense companies. To support the Panzer III, which would be armed with a 37mm anti-tank gun, the new vehicle would have a short-barreled, howitzer-like 75mm as its main gun, and was allotted a weight limit of 24 tonnes (26.46 short tons). Development was carried out under the name Begleitwagen ("accompanying vehicle"), or BW, to disguise its actual purpose, given that Germany was still theoretically bound by the Treaty of Versailles ban on tanks. MAN, Krupp, and Rheinmetall-Borsig each developed prototypes, with Krupp's being selected for further development. The chassis had originally been designed with a six-wheeled Schachtellaufwerk interleaved-roadwheel suspension (as German half-tracks had already adopted), but the German Army amended this to a torsion bar system. Permitting greater vertical deflection of the roadwheels, this was intended to improve performance and crew comfort both on- and off-road. However, due to the urgent requirement for the new tank, neither proposal was adopted, and Krupp instead equipped it with a simple leaf spring double-bogie suspension, with eight rubber-rimmed roadwheels per side. Begleitwagen - Panzer IV MAN prototype Notice the "half-track-like" suspension Begleitwagen - Panzer IV Krupp prototype Notice the leaf spring double-bogie suspension Begleitwagen - Panzer IV Rheinmetall-Borsig prototype Notice the leaf spring double-bogie suspension Begleitwagen - Panzer IV Rheinmetall-Borsig prototype Notice the leaf spring double-bogie suspension The prototype required a crew of five men; the hull contained the engine bay to the rear, with the driver and radio operator, who doubled as the hull machine gunner, seated at the front-left and front-right, respectively. In the turret, the tank commander sat beneath his roof hatch, while the gunner was situated to the left of the gun breech and the loader to the right. The turret was offset 66.5 mm to the left of the chassis center line, while the engine was moved 152.4 mm to the right. This allowed the torque shaft to clear the rotary base junction, which provided electrical power to turn the turret, while connecting to the transmission box mounted in the hull between the driver and radio operator. Due to the asymmetric layout, the right side of the tank contained the bulk of its stowage volume, which was taken up by ready-use ammunition lockers. Panzer IV turret asymmetric layout Accepted into service as the Versuchskraftfahrzeug 622 (Vs.Kfz. 622), production began in 1936 at Fried. Krupp Grusonwerk AG factory at Magdeburg. Panzer IV Ausf. A to Ausf. F1: The first mass-produced version of the Panzer IV was the Ausführung A (abbreviated to Ausf. A, meaning "Variant A"), in 1936. It was powered by Maybach's HL 108TR, producing 250 PS (183.87 kW), and used the SGR 75 transmission with five forward gears and one reverse, achieving a maximum road speed of 31 kilometres per hour. As main armament, the vehicle mounted the short-barreled, howitzer-like 75 mm Kampfwagenkanone 37 L/24 (7.5 cm KwK 37 L/24) tank gun, which was a low-velocity weapon mainly designed to fire high-explosive shells. Against armored targets, firing the Panzergranate (armor-piercing shell) at 430 metres per second the KwK 37 could penetrate 43 millimetres, inclined at 30 degrees, at ranges of up to 700 metres. A 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun was mounted coaxially with the main weapon in the turret, while a second machine gun of the same type was mounted in the front plate of the hull. The main weapon and coaxial machine gun were sighted with a Turmzielfernrohr 5b optic while the hull machine gun was sighted with a Kugelzielfernrohr 2 optic. The Ausf. A was protected by 14.5 mm of steel armor on the front plate of the chassis, and 20 mm on the turret. This was only capable of stopping artillery fragments, small-arms fire, and light anti-tank projectiles. After manufacturing 35 tanks of the A version, in 1937 production moved to the Ausf. B. Improvements included the replacement of the original engine with the more powerful 300 PS (220.65 kW) Maybach HL 120TR, and the transmission with the new SSG 75 transmission, with six forward gears and one reverse gear. Despite a weight increase to 16 t (18 short tons), this improved the tank's speed to 42 kilometres per hour. The glacis plate was augmented to a maximum thickness of 30 millimetres while a new driver's visor was installed on the straightened hull front plate, and the hull-mounted machine gun was replaced by a covered pistol port and visor flap. The superstructure width and ammunition stowage were reduced to save weight. A new commander's cupola was introduced which was adopted from the Panzer III Ausf. C. A Nebelkerzenabwurfvorrichtung (smoke grenade discharger rack) was mounted on the rear of the hull starting in July 1938 and was back fitted to earlier Ausf. A and Ausf. B chassis starting in August 1938. Forty-two Panzer IV Ausf. Bs were manufactured before the introduction of the Ausf. C in 1938. This saw the turret armor increased to 30 mm, which brought the tank's weight to 18.14 t (20.00 short tons). After assembling 40 Ausf. Cs, starting with chassis number 80341, the engine was replaced with the improved HL 120TRM. The last of the 140 Ausf. Cs was produced in August 1939, and production changed to the Ausf. D; this variant, of which 248 vehicles were produced, reintroduced the hull machine gun and changed the turret's internal gun mantlet to a 35 mm thick external mantlet. Again, protection was upgraded, this time by increasing side armor to 20 mm. As the German invasion of Poland in September 1939 came to an end, it was decided to scale up production of the Panzer IV, which was adopted for general use on 27 September 1939 as the Sonderkraftfahrzeug 161 (Sd.Kfz. 161). In response to the difficulty of penetrating the armor of British infantry tanks Matilda and Matilda II during the Battle of France, the Germans had tested a 50 mm gun-based on the 5 cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun on a Panzer IV Ausf. D. However, with the rapid German victory in France, the original order of 80 tanks was canceled before they entered production. Matilda I infantry tank Matilda II infantry tank In October 1940, the Ausf. E was introduced. This had 30mm of armor on the bow plate, while a 30mm appliqué steel plate was added to the glacis as an interim measure. A new driver's visor, adopted from the Sturmgeschütz III was installed on the hull front plate. A new commander's cupola, adopted from the Panzer III Ausf. G, was relocated forward on the turret eliminating the bulge underneath the cupola. Older model Panzer IV tanks were retrofitted with these features when returned to the manufacturer for servicing. 206 Ausf. Es were produced between October 1940 and April 1941. In April 1941, production of the Panzer IV Ausf. F started. It featured 50mm single-plate armor on the turret and hull, as opposed to the appliqué armor added to the Ausf. E, and a further increase in side armor to 30 mm (1.18 in). The main engine exhaust muffler was shortened and a compact auxiliary generator muffler was mounted to its left. The weight of the vehicle was now 22.3 tonnes (24.6 short tons), which required a corresponding modification of track width from 380 to 400 mm to reduce ground pressure. The wider tracks also facilitated the fitting of track shoe "ice sprags" (grousers), and the rear idler wheel and front sprocket were modified. The designation Ausf. F was changed in the meantime to Ausf. F1, after the distinct new model, the Ausf. F2, appeared. A total of 471 Ausf. F (later temporarily called F1) tanks were produced from April 1941 to March 1942. Panzer IV Ausf. F2 to Ausf. J On 26 May 1941, mere weeks before Operation Barbarossa, during a conference with Hitler, it was decided to improve the Panzer IV's main armament. Krupp was awarded the contract to integrate again the 50 mm Pak 38 L/60 gun into the turret. Pak 38 L/60 5,0 cm in the winter The first prototype was to be delivered by 15 November 1941. Within months, the shock of encountering the Soviet T-34 medium and KV-1 heavy tanks necessitated a new, much more powerful tank gun. In November 1941, the decision to up-gun the Panzer IV to the 50 mm gun was dropped, and instead Krupp was contracted in a joint development to modify Rheinmetall's pending 75 mm anti-tank gun design, later known as 7.5 cm Pak 40 L/46. Pak 40 L/46 7,5 cm in rest... Because the recoil length was too great for the tank's turret, the recoil mechanism and chamber were shortened. This resulted in the 75 mm KwK 40 L/43 tank gun. When the new KwK 40 was loaded with the Pzgr. 39 armor-piercing shell, the new gun fired the AP shell at some 750 m/s, a substantial 74% increase over the 430 m/s over the howitzer-like KwK 37 L/24 gun's muzzle velocity. Initially, the KwK 40 gun was mounted with a single-chamber, ball-shaped muzzle brake, which provided just under 50% of the recoil system's braking ability. Firing the Panzergranate 39, the KwK 40 L/43 could penetrate 77 mm of steel armor at a range of 1,830 m. The longer 7.5 cm guns were a mixed blessing. In spite of the designers' efforts to conserve weight, the new weapon made the vehicle nose-heavy to such an extent that the forward suspension springs were under constant compression. This resulted in the tank tending to sway even when no steering was being applied, an effect compounded by the introduction of the Ausführung H in March 1943 The Ausf. F tanks that received the new KwK 40 L/43 gun were temporary named Ausf. F2 (with the designation Sd.Kfz. 161/1). When encountered in North Africa, British nicknamed Ausf F2 of "Mark IV Special", since it was superior to any American or British tank at the time. The tank increased in weight to 23.6 tonnes (26.0 short tons). Differences between the Ausf. F1 and the Ausf. F2 were mainly associated with the change in armament, including an altered gun mantlet, internal travel lock for the main weapon, new gun cradle, new Turmzielfernrohr 5f optic for the L/43 weapon, modified ammunition stowage, and discontinuing of the Nebelkerzenabwurfvorrichtung (rear hull) in favor of turret mounted Nebelwurfgeraet. Three months after beginning production, the Panzer IV Ausf. F2 was renamed Ausf. G. Nebelkerzenabwurfvorrichtung (smoke grenade rack) During its production run from March 1942 to June 1943, the Panzer IV Ausf. G went through further modifications, including another armor upgrade which consisted of a 30mm face-hardened appliqué steel plate welded (later bolted) to the glacis - in total, frontal armor was now 80mm. This decision to increase frontal armor was favorably received according to troop reports on 8 November 1942, despite technical problems of the driving system due to added weight. At this point, it was decided that 50% of Panzer IV production would be fitted with 30mm thick additional armor plates. On 5 January 1943, Hitler decided that all Panzer IV should have 80mm frontal armor. To simplify production, the vision ports on either side of the turret and the loader's forward vision port in the turret front were removed, while a rack for two spare road wheels was installed on the track guard on the left side of the hull. Complementing this, brackets for seven spare track links were added to the glacis plate. For operation in high temperatures, the engine's ventilation was improved by creating slits over the engine deck to the rear of the chassis, and cold weather performance was boosted by adding a device to heat the engine's coolant, as well as a starter fluid injector. A new light replaced the original headlight and the signal port on the turret was removed. On 19 March 1943, the first Panzer IV with Schürzen skirts on its sides and turret was exhibited. Panzer IV Ausf G with schurzen - very late. Kursk July 1943 Notice the commander's cupola hatch The double hatch for the commander's cupola was replaced by a single round hatch from very late model Ausf. G. and the cupola was up-armored from 50mm to 95mm . In April 1943, the KwK 40 L/43 was replaced by the longer 75mm KwK 40 L/48 gun, with a redesigned multi-baffle muzzle brake with improved recoil efficiency. The longer L/48 resulted in the introduction of the Turmzielfernrohr 5f/1 optic. The next version, the Ausf. H, began production in June 1943 and received the designation Sd. Kfz. 161/2. The integrity of the glacis armor was improved by manufacturing it as a single 80mm plate. A reinforced final drive with higher gear ratios was introduced. To prevent adhesion of magnetic anti-tank mines, which the Germans feared would be used in large numbers by the Allies, Zimmerit paste was added to all the vertical surfaces of the tank's armor. The turret roof was reinforced from 10mm to 16mm and 25mm segments. The vehicle's side and turret were further protected by the addition of 5mm hull skirts and 8mm turret skirts. This resulted in the elimination of the vision ports located on the hull side, as the skirts obstructed their view. During the Ausf. H's production run, its rubber-tired return rollers were replaced with cast steel, a lighter cast front sprocket and rear idler wheel gradually replaced the previous components, the hull was fitted with triangular supports for the easily damaged side skirts, the Nebelwurfgeraet was discontinued, and a mount in the turret roof, designed for the Nahverteidigungswaffe (smoke bomb discharger), was plugged by a circular armored plate due to initial production shortages of this weapon. These modifications meant that the tank's weight increased to 25 tonnes (27.56 short tons). In spite of a new six-speed SSG 77 transmission adopted from the Panzer III, top speed dropped to as low as 16 km/h on cross country terrain. An experimental version of the Ausf H was fitted with a hydrostatic transmission but was not put into production Despite addressing the mobility problems introduced by the previous model, the final production version of the Panzer IV, the Ausf. J, was considered a retrograde from the Ausf. H. Born of necessity, to replace heavy losses, it was greatly simplified to speed production. The electric generator that powered the tank's turret traverse was removed, so the turret had to be rotated manually. The turret traversing mechanism was modified and fitted with a second gear which made hand-operation easier when the vehicle was on sloping terrain. On reasonably level ground, hand operation at 4 seconds to traverse to 12.5° and 29.5 seconds to traverse to 120° was achieved. The resulting space was later used for the installation of an auxiliary 200 liters fuel tank; road range was thereby increased to 320 km. The remaining pistol and vision ports on the turret side hatches were removed, and the engine's radiator housing was simplified by changing the slanted sides to straight sides. Three sockets with screw threads for mounting a 2-ton jib boom crane were welded on the turret roof while the hull roof was thickened from 11mm to 16mm. In addition, the cylindrical muffler was replaced by two flame-suppressing mufflers. On June 1944 Wa Prüf 6 had decided that because bomb damage at Panzerfirma Krupp in Essen had seriously jeopardized tank production, all plates which should have been face-hardened for the Panzer IV were instead made with rolled homogeneous armour plate. By late 1944, Zimmerit was no longer being applied to German armored vehicles, and the Panzer IV's side-skirts had been replaced by wire mesh, while the gunner's forward vision port in the turret front was eliminated and the number of return rollers was reduced from four to three to further speed-up production. In a bid to augment the Panzer IV's firepower, an attempt was made to mate a Schmalturm turret -carrying the longer 75mm L/70 tank gun from the developing Panther Ausf. F tank design, and partly developed by Rheinmetall from early 1944 onwards - to a Panzer IV hull. This failed and confirmed that the chassis had reached the limit of its adaptability in both weight and available volume. Production The Panzer IV was originally intended to be used only on a limited scale, so initially Krupp was its sole manufacturer. Prior to the Polish campaign, only 217 Panzer IVs had been produced: 35 Ausf. A; 42 Ausf. B; and 140 Ausf. C; in 1941, production was extended to Vogtländische Maschinenfabrik("VOMAG") (located in the city of Plauen) and the Nibelungenwerke in the Austrian city of St. Valentin. In 1941, an average of 39 tanks per month were built; this rose to 83 in 1942, 252 in 1943, and 300 in 1944. However, in December 1943, Krupp's factory was diverted to manufacture the Sturmgeschütz IV and, in the spring of 1944, the Vomag factory began production of the Jagdpanzer IV, leaving the Nibelungenwerke as the only plant still assembling the Panzer IV. With the slow collapse of German industry under pressure from Allied air and ground offensives - in October 1944 the Nibelungenwerke factory was severely damaged during a bombing raid - by March and April 1945, production had fallen to pre-1942 levels, with only around 55 tanks per month coming off the assembly lines. Export The Panzer IV was the most exported German tank of the Second World War. In 1942, Germany delivered 11 tanks to Romania and 32 to Hungary, many of which were lost on the Eastern Front between the final months of 1942 and the beginning of 1943 during the battles around Stalingrad. Romania received approximately 120 Panzer IV tanks of different models throughout the entire war. To arm Bulgaria, Germany supplied 46 or 91 Panzer IVs, and offered Italy 12 tanks to form the nucleus of a new armored division. These were used to train Italian crews while the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini was deposed, but were retaken by Germany during its occupation of Italy in mid-1943. The Spanish government petitioned for 100 Panzer IVs in March 1943, but only 20 were ever delivered, by December. Spanish Panzer IV Ausf. H Base militar El Goloso - Brigada Acorazada “Guadarrama” XII Museo de Medios Acorazados Finland bought 30, but only received 15 in 1944, and the same year a second batch of 62 or 72 was sent to Hungary (although 20 of these were diverted to replace German losses). In total, 297 Panzer IVs of all models were delivered to Germany's allies. Finnish Panzer IV Ausf. J - Finnish Tank Museum (Panssarimuseo) Parola Combat history The Panzer IV was the only German tank to remain in both production and combat throughout World War II and measured over the entire war it comprised 30% of the Wehrmacht's total tank strength. Although in service by early 1939, in time for the occupation of Czechoslovakia, at the start of the war the majority of German armor was made up of obsolete Panzer Is and Panzer IIs. The Panzer I in particular had already proved inferior to Soviet tanks, such as the T-26, during the Spanish Civil War. Western Front and North Africa (1939–1942): When Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939, its armored corps was composed of 1,445 Panzer Is, 1,223 Panzer IIs, 98 Panzer IIIs and 211 Panzer IVs; the more modern vehicles amounted to less than 10% of Germany's armored strength. The 1st Panzer Division had a roughly equal balance of types, with 17 Panzer Is, 18 Panzer IIs, 28 Panzer IIIs, and 14 Panzer IVs per battalion. The remaining panzer divisions were heavy with obsolete models, equipped as they were with 34 Panzer Is, 33 Panzer IIs, 5 Panzer IIIs, and 6 Panzer IVs per battalion. Panzer IV Ausf A. Tank number 433 Invasion, of Poland - 1939 Although the Polish Army possessed less than 200 tanks capable of penetrating the German light tanks, Polish anti-tank guns proved more of a threat, reinforcing German faith in the value of the close-support Panzer IV. Despite increased production of the medium Panzer IIIs and IVs prior to the German invasion of France on 10 May 1940, the majority of German tanks were still light types. According to Heinz Guderian, the Wehrmacht invaded France with 523 Panzer Is, 955 Panzer IIs, 349 Panzer IIIs, 278 Panzer IVs, 106 Panzer 35(t)s and 228 Panzer 38(t)s. Pzkpfw 35(t) leading three Pzkpfw IVs and behind them a line of Pzkpfw II 6th Panzer Division - France, 1940 Through the use of tactical radios and superior tactics, the Germans were able to outmaneuver and defeat French and British armor. However, Panzer IVs armed with the KwK 37 L/24 75mm gun found it difficult to engage French tanks such as Somua S35 and Char B1. The Somua S35 had a maximum armor thickness of 55mm while the KwK 37 L/24 could only penetrate 43mm at a range of 700 m. The British Matilda II was also heavily armored, with at least 70mm of steel on the front and turret, and a minimum of 65 mm on the sides, but were few in number. Somua S-35 Char B1 bis VERCORS in parade, liberation of France- 1944. Although the Panzer IV was deployed to north Africa ith the German Afrika Korps, until the longer gun variant began production, the tank was outperformed by the Panzer III with respect to armor penetration. Both the Panzer III and IV had difficulty in penetrating the British Matilda II's thick armor, while the Matilda's 40-mm QF 2 pounder gun could knock out either German tank; its major disadvantage was its low speed. By August 1942, Rommel had only received 27 Panzer IV Ausf. F2s, armed with the L/43 gun, which he deployed to spearhead his armored offensives. The longer gun could penetrate all American and British tanks in theater at ranges of up to 1,500 m, by that time the most heavily armored of which was the M3 Grant. Although more of these tanks arrived in North Africa between August and October 1942, their numbers were insignificant compared to the amount of matériel shipped to British forces. M3 Grant The Panzer IV also took part in the invasion of Yugoslavia and the invasion of Greece in early 1941. Eastern Front (1941–1945) With the launching of Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941, the unanticipated appearance of the KV-1 and T-34 tanks prompted an upgrade of the Panzer IV's 75mm gun to a longer, high-velocity 75 mm gun suitable for anti-tank use. This meant that it could now penetrate the T-34 at ranges of up to 1,200m at any angle. The 75 mm KwK 40 L/43 gun on the Panzer IV could penetrate a T-34 at a variety of impact angles beyond 1,000m range and up to 1,600m. Shipment of the first model to mount the new gun, the Ausf. F2, began in spring 1942, and by the summer offensive there were around 135 Panzer IVs with the L/43 tank gun available. German infantry advancing on a Panzer IV Ausf F2 during fighting for the Kerch Peninsula Russian front - May 1942 At the time, the Panzers IV Ausf F2 were the only German tanks that could defeat T-34 or KV-1 with sheer firepower. They played a crucial role in the events that unfolded between June 1942 and March 1943, and the Panzer IV became the mainstay of the German panzer divisions. PzKpfw IV Ausf. F2 belonging to the 12th Panzer Division Volkhov's pocket, Northern Russia - Autumn 1942. Although in service by late September 1942, the Tiger I was not yet numerous enough to make an impact and suffered from serious teething problems, while the Panther was not delivered to German units in the Soviet Union until May 1943. The extent of German reliance on the Panzer IV during this period is reflected by their losses; 502 were destroyed on the Eastern Front in 1942. PzKpfw IV Ausf F2 Volkhov Front - Russia - Spring - 1942 The Panzer IV continued to play an important role during operations in 1943, including at the Battle of Kursk. Newer types, such as the Panther, were still experiencing crippling reliability problems that restricted their combat efficiency, so much of the effort fell to the 841 Panzer IVs that took part in the battle. PzKpfw IV Ausf F2 and PzKpfw III at Kursk. Throughout 1943, the German army lost 2,352 Panzer IVs on the Eastern Front; some divisions were reduced to 12 - 18 tanks by the end of the year. In 1944, a further 2,643 Panzer IVs were destroyed, and such losses were becoming increasingly difficult to replace. Nevertheless, due to a shortage of replacement Panther tanks, the Panzer IV continued to form the core of Germany's armored divisions, including elite units such as the II SS Panzer Corps, through 1944. PzKpfw IV - '612' - .tank captured at 27th Armoured Brigade workshops Normandy - 3 July 1944. In January 1945, 287 Panzer IVs were lost on the Eastern Front. It is estimated that combat against Soviet forces accounted for 6,153 Panzer IVs, or about 75% of all Panzer IV losses during the war. They paid the highest price ... PzKpfw IV Ausf G (late) and a german soldier Kursk - Russsian front - 1943. Western Front (1944–45) Panzer IVs comprised around half of the available German tank strength on the Western Front prior to the Allied invasion of Normandy on 6 June 1944. Most of the 11 panzer divisions that saw action in Normandy initially contained an armored regiment of one battalion of Panzer IVs and another of Panthers, for a total of around 160 tanks, although Waffen-SS panzer divisions were generally larger and better equipped than their Heer counterparts. Even in 1944 the veterans PzKpfw IV Ausf B still fought in front line... 21st Panzer Division- 8th Company of the 22nd Regiment Normandy, France - June 1944. Regular upgrades to the Panzer IV had helped to maintain its reputation as a formidable opponent. The bocage countryside in Normandy favored defense, and German tanks and anti-tank guns inflicted very heavy casualties on Allied armor during the Normandy campaign, despite the overwhelming Allied air superiority. German counter-attacks were blunted in the face of Allied artillery, infantry-held anti-tank weapons, tank destroyers and anti-tank guns, as well as the ubiquitous fighter bomber aircraft. An american soldier preparing a destroyed PzKpfw IV Ausf J from 2nd Waffen-SS Panzer Division to be towed out of the road. Notice four hits: 2 in in front glacis and 2 in the gun mantlet. The rugged terrain caused the side-skirt armor used to predetonate shaped charge anti-tank weapons, such as the British PIAT, to be pulled away. German tankers in all theaters were "frustrated by the way these skirts were easily torn off when going through dense brush". The Allies had also been developing lethality improvement programs of their own; the widely used American-designed M4 Sherman medium tank, while mechanically reliable, suffered from thin armor and an inadequate gun. Against earlier-model Panzer IVs, it could hold its own, but with its 75mm M3 gun, struggled against the late-model Panzer IV (and was unable to penetrate the frontal armor of Panther and Tiger tanks at virtually any range). The late-model Panzer IV's 80mm frontal hull armor could easily withstand hits from the 75mm weapon on the Sherman at normal combat ranges, though the turret remained vulnerable. 30th Infantry Division M4 Sherman passes 2 German Panzer IV Ausf H St. Lo - Normandy 1944 Two battle horses face to face... The British up-gunned the Sherman with their highly effective QF 17 pounder anti-tank gun, resulting in the Sherman Firefly; although this was the only Allied tank capable of dealing with all current German tanks at normal combat ranges, few (342) were available in time for the Normandy invasion. From D-Day to the end of the Normandy campaign, a further 550 Fireflies were built. Sherman Firefly IC Hybrid A second British tank equipped with the 17pdr gun, the Cruiser Mk VIII Challenger, could not participate in the initial landings having to wait for port facilities to be ready to land. Cruiser Challenger It was not until July 1944 that American Shermans, fitted with the 76mm M1 tank gun, achieved a parity in firepower with the Panzer IV. Sherman Medium M4A1 with 76mm gun However, despite the general superiority of its armored vehicles, by 29 August 1944, as the last surviving German troops of Fifth Panzer Army and Seventh Army began retreating towards Germany, the twin cataclysms of the Falaise Pocket and the Seine crossing had cost the Wehrmacht dearly. Of the 2,300 tanks and assault guns it had committed to Normandy (including around 750 Panzer IVs), over 2,200 had been lost. Field MarshalWalter Model reported to Hitler that his panzer divisions had remaining, on average, five or six tanks each. During the winter of 1944-45, the Panzer IV was one of the most widely used tanks in the Ardennes offensive, where further heavy losses - as often due to fuel shortages as to enemy action - impaired major German armored operations in the West thereafter. K.O. PzKpfw IV and M36 Jackson in the Battle of the Bulge - Ardennes, 1944. The Panzer IVs that took part were survivors of the battles in France between June and September 1944, with around 260 additional Panzer IV Ausf. Js issued as reinforcements. Other users The Finns bought 15 new Panzer IV Ausf J in 1944, for 5,000,000 Finnish markkas each (about twice the production price). The remainder of an order for 40 tanks and some StuG were not delivered and neither were German instructors provided. The tanks arrived too late to see action against the Soviets, but were instead used against the Germans during their withdrawal through Lapland. After the war, they served as training tanks, and one portrayed a Soviet KV-1 tank in the movie The Unknown Soldier in 1955. The additional weight, going from the 18.4 tons (Ausf A) to about 25 tons (Ausf J), of these modifications strained the chassis. The overloaded and primitive leaf-spring suspension gave its crew a shaky ride, earning the Panzer IV the nickname "ravistin" ("shaker") in Finnish Service. This not only affected crew comfort, but also hampered the accurate aiming of the main gun. What exactly caused this vibration that gave the PzKw IV Ausf J such a bad name among Finnish tank crews remains somewhat unclear, but suspension seems to be the most likely suspect. After 1945, Bulgaria incorporated its surviving Panzer IVs into defensive bunkers as gunpoints on the border with Turkey, along with T-34 turrets. This defensive line known as the "Krali Marko Line", remained in use until the fall of communism in 1989. Turret and hull of PzKpfw IV in "Krali Marko Line" Twenty Panzer IV Ausf Hs and ten StuG III Ausf Gs were supplied to Spain in December 1943, a small fraction of what Spain had originally asked for. The Panzer IV represented the best tank in Spanish service between 1944 and 1954, and was deployed along with T-26s and Panzer Is. Spain sold 17 Panzer IVs to Syria in 1967; the remaining three are conserved. These can be found at Madrid, Burgos and Santovenia de Pisuerga (Valladolid). Spanish PzKpfw IV in the field... Most of the tanks Romania had received were lost during combat in 1944 and 1945. These tanks, designated T4 in the army inventory, were used by the 2nd Armored Regiment. Rumanian PzKpfw IV at "Muzeul Militar Nationat", Bucharest. On 9 May 1945, only two Panzer IVs were left. Romania received another 50 Panzer IV tanks from the Red Army after the end of the war. These tanks were of different models and were in very poor shape - many of them were missing parts and the side skirts. The T4 tanks remained in service until 1950, when the Army decided to use only Soviet equipment. By 1954, all German tanks had been scrapped. While their numbers remain uncertain, Syria received around 60 Panzers that were refurbished in France during 1950-1952, followed by 50 others purchased from Czechoslovakia in 1954. A Soviet DShK machine gun on an anti-aircraft mount was retrofitted on the cupola. Syrian PzKpfw IV Ausf H captured by Israelis Six Days War Latrun Israeli Museum These were used to shell Israeli settlements below the Golan Heights, and were fired upon in 1965 during the Water War by Israeli Centurion tanks. Syria received 17 Panzer IVs from Spain; these saw combat during the Six-Day War in 1967. In addition, Turkey was a buyer, with 35 Panzer IV received until 4 May 1944 in exchange for some chromium. Delivery began with the Ausf G and probably went on with Ausf H versions. PzKpfwn IV - Etimesgut Tank Muzeum Ankara - Turkey Captured Panzer IVs in service The Soviet Army captured large numbers of German armored vehicles, including Panzer IVs (Russian designation T-4). Some of them were pressed into temporary service and some others were used for training. Pzkpfw IV Ausf F1 - 79th Separate Training Tank Battalion. Crimean Front, April 1942. This captured vehicle initially belonged to the 22nd Panzer Division. Sometimes, captured tanks were used in different temporary units or as single tanks. While captured Tigers and Panthers were only permitted to be used until they broke down, the simplicity of the Panzer IV and the large number of captured parts allowed for repair and continued use. Panther-equipped tank company under command of Gds.Lt. Sotnikov vic Praga (Warsaw's suburb). Poland, Aug. 1944 At least one captured Panzer IV Ausf. J of the 5th Independent Self-Propelled Artillery Squadron, 6th Infantry Division, Poland, May 1945 The 1st GMR (Groupement Mobile de Reconnaissance) of the FFI (French Forces of the Interior), later called 'escadron autonome de Chars Besnier', was equipped in December 1944 with at least one Panzer IV Ausf H/J. Variants: In keeping with the wartime German design philosophy of mounting an existing anti-tank gun on a convenient chassis to give mobility, several tank destroyers and infantry support guns were built around the Panzer IV hull. Both the Jagdpanzer IV, initially armed with the 75mm L/48 tank gun,and the Krupp-manufactured Sturmgeschütz IV, which was the casemate of the Sturmgeschütz III mounted on the body of the Panzer IV, proved highly effective in defense. Jagdpanzer IV Sturmgeschütz IV Cheaper and faster to construct than tanks, but with the disadvantage of a very limited gun traverse, around 1,980 Jagdpanzer IVs and 1,140 Sturmgeschütz IVs were produced. Another tank destroyer, the Panzer IV/70, used the same basic 75mm L/70 gun that was mounted on the Panther. Panzer IV/70 Another variant of the Panzer IV was the Panzerbefehlswagen IV (Pz. Bef. Wg. IV) command tank. This conversion entailed the installation of additional radio sets, mounting racks, transformers, junction boxes, wiring, antennas and an auxiliary electrical generator. To make room for the new equipment, ammunition stowage was reduced from 87 to 72 rounds. The vehicle could coordinate with nearby armor, infantry or even aircraft. Seventeen Panzerbefehlswagen were built on Ausf. J chassis in August and September 1944, while another 88 were based on refurbished chassis. Panzerbefehlswagen IV Ausf J The Panzerbeobachtungswagen IV (Pz. Beob. Wg. IV) was an artillery observation vehicle built on the Panzer IV chassis. Panzerbeobachtungswagen IV artillery observation tank This, too, received new radio equipment and an electrical generator, installed in the left rear corner of the fighting compartment. Panzerbeobachtungswagens worked in cooperation with Wespe and Hummel self-propelled artillery batteries. The Tauchpanzer IV was developed in 1940 for the proposed invasion of Great Britain (Operation Sea Lion – Unternehmen Seelöwe). Tauchpanzer IV were converted in the same way as for the amphibious version of the Panzer III.Total production: 42 converted Panzer IV Ausf D. Tauchpanzer IV Ausf D with fuel trailer Also based on the Panzer IV chassis was the Sturmpanzer IV ( "Brummbar") 150mm infantry-support self-propelled gun. These vehicles were primarily issued to four Sturmpanzer units (Numbers 216, 217, 218 and 219) and used during the battle of Kursk and in Italy in 1943. Two separate versions of the Sturmpanzer IV existed, one without a machine gun in the mantlet and one with a machine gun mounted on the mantlet of the casemate. Sturmpanzer IV SPG 150mm "Brummbar" Furthermore, a 105mm artillery gun was mounted in an experimental demountable turret on a Panzer IV chassis. This variant was called the Heuschrecke ("Grasshopper"). Another 105 mm artillery/anti-tank prototype was the 10.5 cm K (gp.Sfl.) nicknamed Dicker Max. Heuschrecke IVb ("Grasshopper") Pz. SFL IVA Dicker Max 105mm Four different self-propelled anti-aircraft vehicles were built on the Panzer IV hull. The Flakpanzer IV Möbelwagen was armed with a 37mm anti-aircraft cannon; 240 were built between 1944 and 1945. Flakpanzer IV Möbelwagen 37mm AA gun In late 1944 a new Flakpanzer, the Wirbelwind ("Whirlwind"), was designed, with enough armor to protect the gun's crew and a rotating turret, armed with the quadruple 20mm Flakvierling anti-aircraft cannon system; at least 100 were manufactured. Flakpanzer IV Wirbelwind 20mm Flakvierling Sixty-five similar vehicles were built, named Ostwind ("East wind"), but with a single 37mm anti-aircraft cannon instead. This vehicle was designed to replace the Wirbelwind. Flakpanzer IV Ostwind 37mm Flak The final model was the Flakpanzer IV Kugelblitz, of which only five pilot vehicles were built. This vehicle featured an enclosed turret armed with twin 30mm Rheinmetall-Borsig MK 103 aircraft autocannon. Flakpanzer IV Kugelblitz 30mm Although not a direct modification of the Panzer IV, some of its components, in conjunction with parts from the Panzer III, were utilized to make one of the most widely used self-propelled artillery chassis of the war: the Geschützwagen III/IV. This chassis was the basis of the Hummel artillery piece, of which 666 were built, and also the 88mm gun armed Nashorn tank destroyer, with 473 manufactured. To resupply self-propelled howitzers in the field, 150 ammunition carriers were manufactured on the Geschützwagen III/IV chassis. Hummel SPG 150mm Nashorn SPG 88mm AT Another rare variant was the Bergepanzer IV armored recovery vehicle (ARV). Some were believed to have been converted locally, 21 were converted from hulls returned for repair between October 1944 and January 1945. Bergepanzer IV ARV The conversion involved removing the turret and adding a wooden plank cover with an access hatch over the turret ring and the addition of a 2-ton jib crane and rigid towing bars. Production models Ausf.A, 1/BW (Sd.Kfz.161) 35 produced by Krupp-Gruson, between November 1937 and June 1938. Ausf.B, 2/BW 42 produced by Krupp-Gruson, from May to October 1938. Ausf.C, 3/BW 140 produced by Krupp-Gruson, from October 1938 to August 1939. Ausf.D, 4/BW + 5/BW 200 + 48 produced by Krupp-Gruson, from October 1939 to October 1940. Ausf.E, 6/BW 206 produced by Krupp-Gruson, from October 1940 to April 1941. Ausf.F, 7/BW 471 produced by Krupp-Gruson, Vomag and Nibelungenwerke from April 1941 to March 1942. Ausf.F2, 7/BW (Sd.Kfz.161/1) Temporary designation for Ausf F chassis built with long 7.5cm KwK40 L/43 main gun, later renamed into Auf. G and 8/BW. Ausf.G, 8/BW 1,927 produced by Krupp-Gruson, Vomag and Nibelungenwerke from March 1942 to June 1943. Ausf.H, 9/BW (Sd.Kfz.161/2) ~2,324 produced by Krupp-Gruson, Vomag and Nibelungenwerke from June 1943 to February 1944. Ausf.J, 10/BW ~3,160 produced by Vomag Nibelungenwerke from February 1944 to April 1945. Specs: Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf F2 - SdKfz 161/1 Type Medium tank Place of origin Nazi Germany Service history In service 1939–1945 (Nazi Germany) 1954–1967 (Syria) Used by Nazi Germany Romania Turkey Hungary Bulgaria Italy Finland Spain Croatia Syria Wars World War II, 1948 Arab–Israeli War, Six-Day War Production history Designer Krupp Designed 1936 Manufacturer Krupp, Vomag, Nibelungenwerk Unit cost ≈103,462 Reichsmark Produced 1936–1945 No. built ≈8,553 of all variants Variants StuG IV, Jagdpanzer IV, Wirbelwind, Brummbär, Nashorn Specifications - Pz IV Ausf F2, 1942 Weight 23,6 metric tons Length 6.630mm Width 2.880mm Height 2.680mm Crew 5 (commander, gunner, loader, driver, radio operator/bow machine-gunner) Armor Hull front: 50mm Hull side (upper and lower): 30mm Hull rear (upper and lower):20mm Hull roof and floor: 10mm Turret front: 50mm Turret side and rear: 30mm Turret roof: 10mm Main armament 7.5 cm KwK 40 L/43 main gun (87 rounds) Secondary armament 2 × 7.92mm MG 34 machine guns (3.150 rounds) Engine Maybach HL 120 TRM 12-cylinder gasoline engine 300 PS (296 hp, 220 kW) Power/weight 11.2 (HP/metric tons) Transmission (Synchromesh ZF SSG 77) 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios Suspension Leaf spring Fuel capacity 470 liter (3 tanks) Operational range 200 km Speed 42 Km/h The kit: For this project, I used a very old and cheap Italeri/Testors Model Kit Panzer IV (# 808). From the old times: #808 Italeri/Testors kit. Again, why this option?? Why to use this old and inaccurate kit, if there is something more modern and refined in the market ?? Dragon's PzKpfw IV Ausf F2 kit Piece of cake!!! Because I have a BIG stock of old kits in my closet and I will not get rid of these old jewels. Since the kit is not hopelessly bad, with a little work it is possible to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse. This is a hobby ... That's fun! So... let's go... The instructions booklet... very good... Parts in the box... Research stuff... Sanding the trade markings... Building the suspension... Done... Notice the idler wheel, from my spare box parts... Fixing turret flaws... Removing the pistol ports and the bulge in the rear portion Sanding the bulge in the nape of the turret... Paper thin...(fino como papel, in portuguese...) Putty... Smoothing the putty with cetone... Internal reinforcement made with plasticard... Preparing to close the rear rack Thin plasticard and welder... Cutting the excesses and putty work... Testing..testing... The hull and chassis... ...and dry-run with turret... My old workbench...Miss you, my darling... The new and the old... Making weld marks with soldering iron Done... Correcting the rear rack with metal (beer cans) In position So far...so good... Beer can stripes as retaining straps... Leftt side Right side Making the hatch latches (padlock holders) with beer can... testing...testing... Details in the turret's side hatch Done... Love the F2 ball-shaped muzzle brake... Metal details in the right hatch...scratch with beer!!! Commander cupola... The might 75mm gun... Metal handles... In close up... Making the springs in the rear fender... Notice the heated spatula to lock the spring... Done!! Done, indeed!!! electirc wiring... Turret details... step board in metal Research stuff... Research stuff... Done!!! Cleaning the wheels!!! Dremel and scalp... Done!!! For this project, I used for the first time (a long, long time ago...) the salt-chipping method. As my option for this girl was markings and colors for Tunisian front vehicle, First of all, panzer-gray! Panzer-gray... Wheels!!! Notice the PzKpw IV Ausf G (Dragon) under commision Salt!! Sprinkling the diluted salt in water in the desired areas ... In the wheels, too... Salted tank!!! Ready for barbecue!!! And the desert-yellow as final color... DAK!! Left side... Frony view!!! Right side!! Extra fuel tanks... Spare track!!! Starting the weathering... The mufflers!! Salt !! I love drawing profiles with markings and colors. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1. Tunisian front. 7th Panzer Regiment, 10th Panzer Division, in February 1943. Decals and weathering... Front view... Tools... In my old spray booth... Making a leather handle with paper-tape and wire Leather handle in position... Water for the desert... Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1. Tunisian front. 7th Panzer Regiment, 10th Panzer Division, in February 1943. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1. Tunisian front. 7th Panzer Regiment, 10th Panzer Division February 1943. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - left side Panzer IV Ausf F2 - right side Panzer IV Ausf F2 Panzer IV Ausf F2 with Kojak and Rover, the dog. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1. Tunisian front. 7th Panzer Regiment, 10th Panzer Division February 1943. But the history of Panzer IV Ausf F2 dont ends here... A great friend of mine (Hi, Alois...) liked the PzKpfw IV Ausf F2 so much that he commissioned me a similar building, in Desert colors, too. Thankfully he opted for a Dragon, Smart Kit, for that commission. So let's see a modern Dragon kit and its final comparisons with the veteran Testors/Italeri: The box art, as we have seen above: Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.F2(G) Dragon Smart Kit #6360 Starting the history by the booklet!! Wheels!! The chassis tub... The differences in detail between modern and old kits ... Photo-etched details... Metal work... The gun tubes: metal and plastic... Metal, of course... Extra fuel rack and steel cable... Tools and acessories in place... The antenna baffle, in PE, under soldering... ...and in place!! Done for the painting... My friend Alois loves the DAK. He strongly urged that his version be that of the Rommel warriors. I hear and I obey, Tuan !!! As usual, let´s see a profile with markings: Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1. Tunisian front. 8th Panzer Regiment, 15th Panzer Division - Deutsche Afrika Korps December, 1942. Primmer... Desert yellow- base color... Ups and downs!!! Afrika Korps - Future to prevent silvering... 15th Panzer Division - Afrika Korps Wheels and pigments: lots of sands!!! Chipping... Weathering... Damn sand ... It works like an emery !!! Loose Tracks ... Damn sand wearing links pins!! Finally, the girl was ready: Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 from 8th Panzer Regiment, 15th Panzer Division - Deutsche Afrika Korps - Tunisian front - December, 1942. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 8th Panzer Regiment, 15th Panzer Division Deutsche Afrika Korps Tunisian front - December, 1942. Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 - left side Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 - right side Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 - turret Two generations togheter Panzers IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 See you at the next building !!!

To take quality notes, students need to be taught how. This fantastic station-rotation lesson gets the job done, and it can be used with all kinds of other content as well.

Children often come in with last minute projects to complete. Here is one such example.We printed a few pictures of the Colosseum for guida...

Free Original and Exclusive Paper Models and the Best, Rare and Unusual Free Papercrafts of All the World!

Learn about the history and culture of the Netherlands with this lesson plan and accompanying historic model village.

Here are a bunch of creative 3D pyramid model and craft ideas for your kids to get ideas from! Usually in school Egypt is a unit study.

L'exploitation d'une oeuvre pour compléter un travail sur le tracé de traits verticaux, horizontaux ou oblique... A partir de "Autoportrait II" de Dubuffet Niveau conseillé : 1/ Matériel Papier Créatex A4 blanc ( ou type Bristol ou à défaut papier...

Virginia history begins with studies of the Jamestown Colony, and this post is filled with ideas for teaching about Colonial Times across the curriculum. Check it out on Virginia is for Teachers.

A new book surveys the stunning work of Ezra Stoller, the most prominent photographer of 20th-century American architecture

Dodo, extinct flightless bird of Mauritius, one of the three species that constituted the family Raphidae.

Everyone is familiar with Georgia O'Keeffe's larger then life flowers, and if they are not, they should be! She was an amazing artist: at the forefront of the American Modernism. Her art career spans decades and is as fascinating as the woman herself. ***This page contains affiliate links.*** When it came down to doing an

Image 1 of 6 from gallery of A Tale of Two Buildings: The Argument Behind Preservation and Reuse. Photoshopped Philip Johnson with 550 Madison Model. Image © Sungwoo Choi

In this activity, you will explore rivers, lakes, and oceans by modeling them inside a pan using aluminum foil, sand, pebbles, and real water!

O'Keeffe's paintings make great inspiration for kids' art projects, so let's check out 10 of the best Georgia O'Keeffe projects for kids!

Explore the interior of the grandest ship of all time. Discover what's inside Titanic and why it was a generational leap above all other ships of the era.

Téléchargez ces Photo premium sur Modèle d'affiche froissé froissé de texture de papier vertical Maquette de papier isolé, et découvrez plus de 60M de ressources graphiques professionnelles sur Freepik

 What's it all about? Before we go any further, a cautionary note regarding timelines of the period. There is general agreement amongst scholars of timing of names and events but absolute dates and how they are applied does vary. I have used a commonly accepted timeline and all dates are given that way. Therefore you will most likely see variation from some sources but even then the event is generally placed in the right context, so it is still identifiable and understood. In the end, getting hung up on a few years or even +/- 50 years in some cases, is something of a pointless exercise. For those new to the period a brief history of the flow of events will prove useful to give a framework for names and places. This will provide a context for all other posts. That is the purpose of this post. The following source has been edited from its original content, along with additional material, to maintain a consistant timeline and focus on the military and political events which are our primary areas of concern. That said their is broad background information to give a grand sense of what was happening in the Near East at the time. A brief history of the Third Millennium in the Near East. Sumer The city of Uruk had 10,000 people in 3800 BC, and with pottery manufacturing increasing eight hundred years later 50,000 people were protected by defensive walls. Most settlements by this time were fortified, and documents written about 2600 BC describe major conflicts between the city-states of Ur, Uruk, Umma, and others. With cities came civilization and its organized violence—war. In addition to pottery, other specializations included stonecutters, bricklayers, metalsmiths, farmers, fishers, shepherds, weavers, leather-workers, and sailors. The wheel was invented for carts, war-chariots, and pottery-making. Iron was smelted about 2500 BC. Seals had been used to stamp a carved insignia on clay before cylindrical seals became widespread for labeling commodities and legal documents. Pictographic writing was first used by the Sumerians about 3400, and by 3000 BC this had evolved into cuneiform words and syllables. The Sumerian language was not deciphered until the nineteenth century of our era when it was found to be different from both the Indo-European and Semitic language groups. Fifteen hundred cuneiform symbols were reduced in the next thousand years to about seven hundred, but it did not become alphabetic until about 1300 BC. By 2500 BC libraries were established at Shuruppak and Eresh, and schools had been established to train scribes for the temple and state bureaucracies as well as to legally document contracts and business transactions. Schools were regularly attended by the sons of the aristocracy and successful; discipline was by caning. Religion was the central organizing principle of the city states, each city belonging to a different deity, who was worshipped in a large temple. Families also had their own special gods or goddesses, and people prayed by clasping their hands in front of their chests. The temple was built on top of the ruins of the previous temple until in Uruk the temple of Anu, the god of heaven, rose fifty feet above the plain. Eventually these temples became man-made mountains, like the ziqqurats of Ur, Uruk, Eridu, and Nippur. About a third of the land was owned by the temple, which employed many people; some of their land was loaned out at interest or leased for a seventh or eighth of the harvest. A ruler was called a lord (en) and was often deified. Each city had a governor (ensi) or a king (lugal meaning literally "great man") who lived in a great house (egal), and they often had religious duties as well, particularly to build and maintain temples. The wife of the king was called a lady or queen (nin), and she might take on important projects such as managing the affairs of a temple goddess. Below the king or governor society had three distinct classes: aristocratic nobles, who were administrators, priests, and officers in the army rewarded with large estates; a middle class of business people, school teachers, artisans, and farmers; and the lowest being slaves, who had been captured in war or were dispossessed farmers or those sold by their families. Slavery was not stigmatized by race but was considered a misfortune out of which one could free oneself through service, usually in three years. How then did these social hierarchies develop? Given the limited knowledge available, our explanations are speculative and uncertain. As the pastoral peoples traded with the farmers and villagers, more complex social organizations could function more productively. The manufacturing of pottery and other products led to specialization and trading by barter, as the Sumerians had no money system except for the weighing of precious metals. As irrigation systems became more complex, planners and managers of labor were needed. Protection of surplus goods and valuable construction was required to guard against raiding parties. Those with the ability to organize and manage more complex activities tended to give themselves privileges for their success, and eventually social inequalities grew, as those who failed lost their privileges. Religion also became a part of this system of inequality, as religious leaders placed themselves above others in their service of the deities. The Geography Of Mesopotamia Around 6000 B.C., after the agricultural revolution had begun to spread from its place of origin on the northern fringes of the Fertile Crescent, Neolithic farmers started filtering into the Fertile Crescent itself. Although this broad plain received insufficient rainfall to support agriculture, the eastern section was watered by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Known in ancient days as Mesopotamia (Greek for "between the rivers"), the lower reaches of this plain, beginning near the point where the two rivers nearly converge, was called Babylonia. Babylonia in turn encompassed two geographical areas - Akkad in the north and Sumer, the delta of this river system, in the south. Broken by river channels teeming with fish and re-fertilized frequently by alluvial silt laid down by uncontrolled floods, Sumer had a splendid agricultural potential if the environmental problems could be solved. "Arable land had literally to be created out of a chaos of swamps and sand banks by a 'separation' of land from water; the swamps ... drained; the floods controlled; and lifegiving waters led to the rainless desert by artificial canals". In the course of the several successive cultural phases that followed the arrival of the first Neolithic farmers, these and other related problems were solved by cooperative effort. Between 3500 B.C. and 3100 B.C. the foundations were laid for a type of economy and social order markedly different from anything previously known. This far more complex culture, based on large urban centers rather than simple villages, is what we associate with civilization. By discovering how to use metals to make tools and weapons, late Neolithic people effected a revolution nearly as far-reaching as that wrought in agriculture. Neolithic artisans discovered how to extract copper from oxide ores by heating them with charcoal. Then about 3100 B.C., metal workers discovered that copper was improved by the addition of tin. The resulting alloy, bronze, was harder than copper and provided a sharper cutting edge. Thus the advent of civilization in Sumer is associated with the beginning of the Bronze Age in the West, which in time spread to Egypt, Europe, and Asia. The Bronze age lasted until about 1200 B.C., when iron weapons and tools began to replace those made of bronze. The first plow was probably a stick pulled through the soil with a rope. In time, however, domesticated cattle were harnessed to drag the plow in place of the farmer. Yoked, harnessed animals pulled plows in the Mesopotamian alluvium by 3000 B.C. As a result, farming advanced from the cultivation of small plots to the tilling of extensive fields. "By harnessing the ox man began to control and use a motive power other than that furnished by his own muscular energy. The ox was the first step to the steam engine and gasoline motor". Since the Mesopotamian plain had no stone, no metals, and no timber except its soft palm trees, these materials had to be transported from Syria and Asia Minor. Water transport down the Tigris and Euphrates solved the problem. The oldest sailing boat known is represented by a model found in a Sumerian grave of about 3500 B.C. Soon after this date wheeled vehicles appear in the form of ass-drawn war chariots. For the transport of goods overland, however, people continued to rely on the pack ass. Another important invention was the potter's wheel, first used in Sumer soon after 3500 B.C. Earlier, people had fashioned pots by molding or coiling clay by hand, but now a symmetrical product could be produced in a much shorter time. A pivoted clay disk heavy enough to revolve of its own momentum, the potter's wheel has been called "the first really mechanical device." The Land of the Two Rivers The word Mesopotamia , derived from the Greek, means literally "between the rivers," but it is generally used to denote the whole plain between and on either side of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The plain was bordered to the north and east by mountain ranges, in whose foothills, as we have seen, agriculture was first practiced. To the southwest lay the forbidding deserts of Syria and Arabia . Each year the two great rivers were swollen with the winter snows of the northern mountains, and each year at flood stage they spread a thick layer of immensely fertile silt across the flood plain where they approached the Persian Gulf . This delta, a land of swamp rich in fish, wildlife, and date palms, was the most challenging and rewarding of the three natural units into which the river valleys were divided; and it was here, between 3500 and 3000 B. C., that agricultural settlers created the rich city-states of Sumer, of which the best known is Ur . The delta could only be made habitable by large-scale irrigation and flood control, which was managed first by a priestly class and then by godlike kings. Except for the period 2370-2230 B. C., when the Sumerian city-states were subdued by the rulers of Akkad , the region immediately to the north, the Sumerians remained prosperous and powerful until the beginning of the second millennium B. C. Immediately to the north of Sumer , where the two rivers came most closely together, the plain was less subject to flooding but made fertile by rainfall and irrigation. This area, known first as Akkad , was inhabited by Semitic peoples who subdued the Sumerians in the middle of the third millennium; but when a new Semitic people called the Amorites conquered the area about 2000 B. C. and founded a great new capital city of Babylon ; the area henceforth came to be known as Babylonia . Except for invasions of Hittites and Kassites, who were Indo-European peoples from Asia , Babylonia continued to dominate Mesopotamia for a thousand years. The third natural region, called Assyria , stretched from the north of Babylonia to the Taurus range. Its rolling hills were watered by a large number of streams flowing from the surrounding mountains as well as by the headwaters of the two great rivers themselves. The Assyrians, a viciously warlike Semitic people, were able to conquer the whole of Mesopotamia in the eighth and seventh centuries B. C. Thus the history of Mesopotamia can be envisaged as a shift of the center of power northwards, from Sumer to Babylonia and then to Assyria. History The first dynasty after the great flood was in the Akkadian region northwest of Sumer in the city of Kish, ten miles east of what became Babylon. According to Georges Roux, twelve of the kings' names were Semitic rather than Sumerian. Thus from its historical beginnings the Sumerian civilization was mixed with Semitic influences. The first legendary ruler Etana was said to have ascended to heaven on the back of an eagle. The oldest historical king, Mebaragesi, ruled Kish about 2700 BC and apparently overcame the Sumerians' eastern neighbor at Elam, for he is said to have carried away their weapons as spoil. The second dynasty at Uruk in Sumer itself must have overlapped with the first because it was the legendary fifth king of that dynasty, Gilgamesh (2700-2680), who was attacked by the last Kish king Agga. An ancient account told the following story: Agga, having besieged Uruk, sent envoys to Gilgamesh with an ultimatum. Gilgamesh went to his city's elders, suggesting that they not submit but fight with weapons. However, the elders came to the opposite conclusion. So Gilgamesh took his proposal to the "men of the city," and they agreed with him. Gilgamesh was elated and said to his servant Enkidu, "Now, then, let the (peaceful) tool be put aside for the violence of battle." The Uruk dynasty was well known in Sumerian tradition, as Gilgamesh was preceded by Meskiaggasher, son of the sun-god Utu, Enmerkar also son of Utu who built Uruk, the shepherd Lugalbanda, who was also considered divine, and the fisherman Dumuzi, the legendary vegetation god who married the love goddess Inanna. Tales of Gilgamesh became very popular. Warrior kings In this period we have the great struggle between the neighboring city-states Umma and Lagash. Mesalim (c.2500), who called himself King of Kish, erected a temple to Ningirsu in Lagash, for which he arbitrated a territorial dispute with Umma and set up a stela marking the border. However, he was defeated, as was the last king of Uruk, by the founder of the Ur dynasty, Mesannepadda (2563-2524), whose name meant the hero chosen by An. This marked the Rise of Ur. He and his successor rebuilt the Tummal temple at Nippur which had fallen into ruin. The peace between Lagash and Umma was maintained for about a century as Lagash’s King Ur-Nanshe (2495-2475) built temples, dug canals, and imported wood from Dilmun. Meanwhile Mesannepadda sent gifts to the distant Mari. The rulers of Ur became extraordinarily wealthy as indicated by their royal tombs in the mid-27th century. A royal standard shows four-wheeled battle-carts pulled by asses and rows of prisoners presented to the king. Eventually Kish was occupied by mountain people from Khamazi while the Elamites encroached on Sumer. In Lagash Ur-Nanshe's grandson, Eannatum (2454-2425), who also built temples and dug canals, became a warrior, fighting back against the Elamites, conquering Ur and Uruk, and taking the kingship of Kish. Closer to home was the local conflict with Umma. Claiming his god commanded it, the governor of Umma raided the disputed field of Gu-edin, removed the marker set up by Mesalim, and invaded the territory of Lagash. However, Eannatum won the battle with the help of his god Enlil and captured in a great net his enemies, who begged for life. A peace treaty was agreed upon with Enakalli, the next governor of Umma, and Mesalim's stela was restored to its former place. Umma was required to pay heavy taxes in barley, and Eannatum's victory was commemorated by a stela depicting vultures tearing up the corpses of the defeated. Eannatum boasted of killing 3,600 men of Umma and had to bury twenty heaps of his own men. Later Eannatum had to fight a coalition of forces from Kish and Mari led by the King of Akshak; though he claimed victory, his little empire was declining. Umma once again seized the disputed canal, destroyed the stela of the vultures, and defeated Eannatum. Eannatum was succedded by his brother Eannatum I (2425-2405) who fought rebellious elements tenuously holding onto power. However, his nephew, Entemena (2405-2385), regained the canal from Umma even though they were backed by foreign kings (probably from Mari). He assigned his own governor to control the irrigation Lagash needed. Entemena also constructed new canals, attained a "brotherhood pact" with Lugal-kinishe-dudu, who had united Uruk and Ur, and for a reign of peace and prosperity was deified by a grateful people with statues for nearly a thousand years. Eannatum II (2374-2365) was succeeded by a high priest of the warrior god Ningirsu, and for a time peace prevailed as the people of Umma were allowed to live in Lagash with religious and civil liberties. However, conditions deteriorated as they were ruled by the distant kings of Kish who appointed the local governors, and the priesthood became corrupted and greedy for land and taxes. Finally a strong leader arose named Urukagina (2343-2335), who threw off the allegiance to Kish, proclaimed himself king of Lagash, and instituted sweeping reforms directed against the extortion of the priesthood. At the same time as Urukagina was reforming the temple, he was rebuilding it and other shrines in Lagash. Unfortunately after only eight years of this rule by the world's first known reformer, the army of Umma led by its governor, Lugalzagesi (2340-2316), attacked Lagash possibly unresisted by Urukagina, burned the shrines, and carried off the divine image of Ningirsu. Assuming the existence of moral justice, the chronicler lamented, "The men of Umma, by the despoiling of Lagash, have committed a sin against the god Ningirsu.... As for Lugalzagesi, ensi of Umma, may his goddess Nidaba make him bear his mortal sin upon his head!" Lugalzagesi went on to conquer and become king of Uruk and claim all of Sumer under the god Enlil from the lower sea (Persian Gulf) including the Tigris and Euphrates all the way to the upper sea (Mediterranean). In his wars he defeated the city-states of Kish, Lagash, Ur, Nippur and Larsa. and by these conquests he created the first Sumerian Empire and became more powerful than any before. However, to do this he had to ally himself with the cup-bearer of Kish, where Lugalzagesi had begun life himself as a vassal. His reign of 24 years was to mark the end of that Sumerian empire in about 2334 BC, for the name of that Akkadian cup-bearer was Sargon. Sargon the Akkadian According to legend Sargon did not know his father and claimed his mother was a "changeling," though some have assumed she was probably a temple prostitute. A Neo-Assyrian (7th century BC) text recounted how his mother bore him in secret, put her baby in a basket of rushes sealed with bitumen, and cast it upon the Euphrates River. The river carried him to Akki, a drawer of water, who reared Sargon as a son and appointed him as his gardener. As a gardener Sargon claimed he received the love of the goddess Ishtar. More ancient inscriptions described him as the cup-bearer of Ur-Zababa, the King of Kish, whom either he or Lugalzagesi overthrew. Sargon (2334-2279) marched against Uruk to attack Lugalzagesi, who, though he had fifty governors under his command, was defeated, captured, and brought to Kish, where he was yoked by the neck to Enlil's gate. Having consolidated his power in the north, Sargon went down river to attack and tear down the walls of Ur, Lagash, and Umma, not stopping until his warriors had "washed their weapons" in the lower sea (Persian Gulf). He built a new capital called Agade on the Euphrates with temples dedicated to Ishtar and the warrior god Zababa of the Kish. Semitic speakers were given authority over the Sumerians as he appointed Akkadian governors in all the major cities. The Akkadian language became as official as Sumerian; but following Sumerian religious traditions, he appointed his daughter priestess of Nanna, the moon god of Ur, and called himself the anointed priest of Anu and the great governor of Enlil. Ambitious to expand his new empire and gain material resources, Sargon crossed the Tigris River and attacked four rulers in Iran, eventually defeating them and making the kings of Elam, Barshashe, and others his vassals. He then went northwest, where he prostrated himself before the grain-god Dagan, who "gave" him the upper region of Mari, Iarmuti, and Ebla to the cedar forest (Lebanon) and the silver (Taurus) mountains, thus gaining ample timber and precious metals. This must have been a major war because at that time Ebla was ruling over all of Syria and Palestine. Some even believe that Sargon crossed the western sea and landed on Cyprus and Crete. Sargon ruled over this vast empire until his death, but even at the end he was still fighting battles against a major revolt, destroying a vast army. He was succeeded by his son, Rimush (2278-2270), who put down the revolts in Sumer, Iran, and Elam; but his battles involving tens of thousands of troops may have angered his administrators, because after only nine years, they "killed him with their tablets," showing that in those days even the written word could be a lethal weapon. His brother Manishtusu (2269-2255) continued these wars and boasted how he had secured silver mines and diorite for statues from southern Elam. (Note there is recent evidence to suggest that Manishtusu was king before Rimush..a reminder that new evidence is emerging to counter previously accepted views). Victory Stele of Naram-Sin marking his victory over the Lullibi. His son, Naram-Sin (2254-2218), also chose war for the northwestern copper and tin needed for bronze as well as the southern silver. He not only aggrandized his title from King of Agade to King of the Four Regions and King of the Universe, but he also added the star meaning god before his name. Naram-Sin ruled until 2218 BC and fought numerous wars even against the local Kish and Uruk and as far away as Ebla, Lebanon, the Zagros mountains, and in a major war with the Lullubi east of the Tigris. Later the first philosopher of history criticized Naram-Sin for morally bringing about the destruction of Agade by the Guti because he had devastated the temple at Nippur. Puzur-Inshushinak, the governor of Elam, fought the southern tribes of Zagros on behalf of Naram-Sin; but after the latter died, Puzur-Inshushinak declared himself King of the Universe; and the new king of Agade, Sharkalisharri (2218-2193), busy with Sumerian revolts and other far-flung wars, could not object. A palace revolution also ended his reign in 2193 BC, and in the next three years the list of kings had four names, asking, "Who was king? Who was not king?" Like the Elamites, the Lullubi became independent, and eventually the Guti invaded from the north. The Gutians overthrow Elam and swept through Sumer, effectively destroying the Akkadian empire, and ending Sumerian/Akkadian domination of the region (c.2193 BC). For the enrichment of a few these wars were fought for bronze, silver, wood, and stone and the cheap labor of slaves captured in battle. Trade had been expanded, perhaps as far as the Indus valley, but at what a cost! Small city-states were overcome by centralized kingdoms, and Akkadian emphasis on private property resulted in large estates for royalty and military nobles and a lessening of the power and domains of the temples in Sumer. Sumerian Revival The Guti ruled over Mesopotamia for nearly a century; but the trade routes were open, and local governors seemed to be autonomous. One of these in a city near the capital called Girsu was Gudea, governor of Lagash from 2123 to 2121 BC. Lugalzagesi of Umma had burned down Girsu, but Gudea rebuilt it with fifteen or more temples, inspired by a dream. Gudea obeyed the dream and tried to unite the people of Girsu "as sons of the same mother" by purifying the city with encircling fires, putting clay in a pure place; making bricks, he purified the foundations of the temple and anointed the platform with perfume. The city was also purified morally: complaints, accusations, and punishments were to cease; mothers were not to scold their children nor should children raise their voices against their parents; slaves were not to be struck. Then workers from Elam and Susa collected timber from their mountains and brought it to Girsu. Cedars were cut with great axes and like giant snakes were floated down the river. Stone was brought in large blocks, copper from Kimash, silver from distant mines, and red stone from Meluhha (possibly Ethiopia or the Indus). Construction took a year, and then the god could enter the temple. Statues of Gudea portray a calm and pious ruler, but in attaining all these building materials there was at least one war with the Elamites of Anshan. About 2119 BC the governor of Uruk, Utu-hegal, revolted against the Guti "serpent of the hills" and with the help of other cities defeated the foreigners. However, Uruk was not able to hold the power, as seven years later Ur-Nammu (2112-2095), the governor of Ur, proclaimed himself king of Ur, Sumer, and Akkad (2112-2095). This Third Dynasty of Ur lasted just over a century (2112-2004) and is considered the final glory of Sumerian civilization. Ur-Nammu is credited with freeing the land of thieves, robbers, and rebels, and using "principles of equity and truth" he promulgated the oldest known code of laws. According to the ancient text Ur-Nammu established "equity in the land and banished malediction, violence, and strife." Ur-Nammu promoted extensive building in canals and temples, erecting large ziqqurats in Ur, Uruk, Eridu, Nippur, and other cities, but he died abandoned on the battlefield in an unknown war and was succeeded by his son, Shulgi, who ruled for 47 years (2094-2047 BC). The first half of his reign was spent completing the temples and ziqqurats, reinstating the gods in their shrines with newly appointed high priests, supporting the schools, and reforming the calendar and the standards for measuring grain. Then Shulgi began a series of military campaigns in the plains and mountains north of Diyala. He pacified other regions by marrying his daughters to governors in Barshashe, Anshan, and Susa. He built temples for the gods of Elam, called himself King of the Four Quarters, and was worshipped as a god. From 2094 to 2038 BC Shulgi and his son, Amar-Sin, ruled over an empire more unified than the Akkadian empire of Sargon. The city-states became administrative districts governed by officials observed by royal inspectors and replaced by royal commands. Military affairs were controlled by the monarch and the generals he appointed. Fortresses guarded the main roads, and royal couriers were given rations of food at each stop. From thousands of administrative tablets scholars have learned that the state had now overwhelmed the importance of the temple and private property. The government owned and operated large factories, workshops, and trading posts, and oversaw thousands of laborers in agriculture, industry, public works, civil service, and police. Workers were either freemen who paid taxes in corvées and military service, lesser paid serfs under the king's protection, or slaves. Officials received free meat, beer, and clothes and could own houses, fields, asses, and slaves. Governors and generals, who were paid by taxes, could be quite wealthy. In a middle class between these two extremes were some merchants and small land owners, who farmed by borrowing at one-fifth to one-third interest rates. Amar-Sin was succeeded by his brother, Shu-Sin, who ruled for eight years (2037-2029), coming into conflict with an uncivilized people in the northwest called the Martu or Amorites, who were contemptuously described as not knowing about grain or agriculture or houses or burials but were mountain boors eating raw meat. When Shu-Sin was succeeded by his son, Ibbi-Sin, the empire soon disintegrated (2028-2004). Eshnunna and Susa in the southeast became independent, and then the Amorites attacked from the north. One of the king's generals, Ishbi-Irra in Mari, wrote to him that he could not deliver the grain Ibbi-Sin wanted from Nippur and Isin because the Amorites had cut off the roads. Ibbi-Sin was depressed by the bad omens and believed that Enlil hated him. Ishbi-Irra asked his sovereign for permission to defend the two cities, and he defeated the Amorites. Believing he was favored by Enlil, in Ishbi-Irra proclaimed himself king of Isin, and his dynasty there lasted until 1794 BC. An Amorite had already been crowned in Larsa near Ur. When the Elamites invaded Sumer, Ibbi-Sin, facing a famine and enemies on two fronts, tried to ally himself with the Amorites against Ibbi-Irra and the Elamites. However, this too failed, and in 2004 BC the glorious city of Ur, starving under siege, was attacked and burned down, a catastrophe the scribes attributed to the wrath of Enlil. Ibbi-Sin was captured and died in the foreign land of Anshan he had once himself devastated. Sumerian civilization had failed to contain the contagion of war, and it would never rise again.