Panzerkampfwagen III (Fl)

Panzerkampfwagen III (Fl)


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Panzerkampfwagen III (Fl)

The Panzerkampfwagen III (Fl) was a flamethrower equipped tank based on the Panzer III Ausf M. The idea of converting the Panzer III to carry a flamethrower had originated in November 1942, when it was intended to send them to Stalingrad to take part in the street fighting in the city, but none were ready in time.

One hundred Panzer III Ausf Ms built by MIAG in Braunschweig were delivered to Wegmann Waggonfabrik of Kassel, who carried out the conversions. The 5cm gun of the Ausf M was removed and replaced by a 14cm flame oil projector, with a barrel 1.5m long. 1,000 litres of flame oil was carried, which was enough for 80 bursts of two-three second duration. The flames had a maximum range of 60 yards, but an effective range of nearer to 40 yards. A 2-stroke auxiliary engine was installed in the hull to power the flame thrower.

Although the Panzerkampfwagen II (Fl) arrived too late for Stalingrad, forty one were involved in the battle of Kursk, split between the 6th and 11th Panzer Divisions and Panzer Division Grossdeutschland.

Names
Panzerkampfwagen III (Fl)
Flammpanzer
Sd Kfz 141/3

Stats
Number produced: 100
Produced: February-April 1943
Length: 6.41m
Hull Width: 2.95m/ 9ft 8in
Height: 2.50m/ 8ft 2in
Crew: 3 (Commander, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Engine: Maybach HL120TRM
Max Speed: 40km/hr/ 24mph
Max Range: 155km/ 96 miles
Armament: One 14mm Flammenwerfer, plus one 7.92mm MG 34 in turret and one in front of superstructure

Armour


Armour

Front

Side

Rear

Top/ Bottom

Turret

57mm/ 2.25in

30mm/ 1.2in

30mm/ 1.2in

10mm/ 0.4in

Superstructure

50mm/ 2in

30mm/ 1.2in

50mm/ 2 in

18mm/ 0.66in

Hull

50mm/ 2in

30mm/ 1.2in

50mm/ 2 in

16mm/ 0.62in

Gun mantlet

50mm/ 2 in

Bookmark this page: Delicious Facebook StumbleUpon


History of Florida

The history of Florida can be traced to when the first Native Americans began to inhabit the peninsula as early as 14,000 years ago. [1] They left behind artifacts and archeological evidence. Florida's written history begins with the arrival of Europeans the Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León in 1513 made the first textual records. The state received its name from that conquistador, who called the peninsula La Pascua Florida in recognition of the verdant landscape and because it was the Easter season, which the Spaniards called Pascua Florida (Festival of Flowers). [2] [3] [4]

This area was the first mainland realm of the United States to be settled by Europeans. Thus, 1513 marked the beginning of the American frontier. From that time of contact, Florida has had many waves of colonization and immigration, including French and Spanish settlement during the 16th century, as well as entry of new Native American groups migrating from elsewhere in the South, and free blacks and fugitive slaves, who in the 19th century became allied with the Native Americans as Black Seminoles. Florida was under colonial rule by Spain from the 16th century to the 19th century, and briefly by Great Britain during the 18th century (1763–1783) before becoming a territory of the United States in 1821. Two decades later, in 1845, Florida was admitted to the union as the 27th US state.

Florida is nicknamed the "Sunshine State" due to its warm climate and days of sunshine, which have attracted northern migrants and vacationers since the 1920s. A diverse population and urbanized economy would develop during the 20th century. In 2011, Florida with over 19 million people, surpassed New York and became the third most populous state in the nation. [5]

The economy of Florida has developed over time, starting with natural resource exploitation in logging, mining, fishing, and sponge diving as well as cattle ranching, farming, and citrus growing. The tourism, real estate, trade, banking, and retirement destination businesses would follow later on.


Vývoj [ editovat | editovat zdroj ]

Tank Pz III měl představovat hlavní bitevní tank německých vojsk v nastávající válce. Jeho původní verze byly vyzbrojeny 37mm kanonem, předpokládalo se, že by časem mohly být přezbrojeny na 50mm kanony. Tank se v prvních taženích osvědčil, byť jeho relativně slabá výzbroj se ukazovala jako problematická, pokud se setkal s odolnějšími francouzskými nebo britskými tanky. V roce 1940 se proto začaly objevovat první stroje s krátkými 50mm kanony. Stroje s 50mm kanony (Panzer III J) byly například použity německými vojsky v bitvě o Gazalu.

Původní koncepce tanku byla přehodnocena během zahájení operace Barbarossa. Tanky Pz III se začaly setkávat s masami tanků T-34 a KV-1, na něž jejich kanony vůbec nestačily. Urychleně proto byly vyvinuty nové typy vyzbrojené dlouhými 50mm kanony (5 cm KwK 39 L/60) a starší tanky byly přezbrojovány. Ačkoliv tak došlo ke značnému zvýšení úderné síly, Pz III stále ještě nepředstavovaly adekvátní prostředek pro boj s ruskými protějšky. Nakonec nezbylo než akceptovat skutečnost, že Pz III byl příliš malý a lehký a neumožňoval instalaci dostatečně silné zbraně. Proto byla jeho výroba v roce 1943 ukončena.

Hned v počátku se kolem tohoto stroje objevil konflikt mezi zbrojním úřadem a inspektorátem motorizovaných vojsk týkající se hlavní výzbroje nového tanku. Zatímco zbrojní úřad (Waffenamt) považoval za dostatečný kanon ráže 37 mm, druhá strana trvala na ráži 50 mm. Nakonec byl vybrán kanon menšího kalibru protože i ostatní vojsko již bylo vyzbrojeno protitankovými kanony 3,7 cm, díky čemuž stačila výroba pouze jednoho druhu munice. Dle požadavku inspektorátu byla však alespoň věž tanku konstruována tak, aby umožňovala případné pozdější osazení kanonem větší ráže.

V roce 1934 formuloval zbrojní úřad konečně požadované charakteristiky nového stroje a předal je firmám MAN, Daimler-Benz, Rheinmetall-Borsig a Krupp spolu s objednávkou na vývoj prototypu. Hmotnost vozidla neměla podle specifikací překročit 15 tun. Požadovaná maximální rychlost stroje byla 40 km/h a posádku mělo tvořit pět mužů - velitel, střelec a nabíječ umístění ve věži, řidič a radista v přední části trupu. Stroj měl být samozřejmě plně pásový s výzbrojí soustředěnou v otočné věži.

Pouze firmy Krupp a Daimler-Benz však dovedly vývoj až k postavení prototypu. Stroj firmy Krupp, označovaný MKA, spočíval na podvozku složeném ze šesti plných pojezdových kol, loukoťového kola napínacího a kola hnacího s kruhovými odlehčovacími otvory. V horní části dosedal pás na tři podpůrné kladky. Trup tanku byl tvořen rovnými pancéřovými deskami, které byly spojeny většinou svárem. Za prudce skosenou čelní deskou se zvedala nástavba v jejíž přední stěně se nalevo nacházel průzor řidiče. Další průzory byly na obou bocích. Levým vyhlížel opět řidič, pravý sloužil radistovi, který měl v této části stroje své stanoviště.

Na ploché desce nástavby byla zhruba v polovině délky stroje umístěna plně otočná věž. V zádi trupu byl potom motorový prostor. Přední spodní rohy věže byly skosené, což se stalo pro věže pozdějších tanků standardem. V čelním štítu věže byla instalována hlavní zbraň, kanon ráže 37 mm a doplňkový kulomet ráže 7,92 mm.

Testy obou prototypů probíhaly v oblasti Kummersdorfu a Ulmu na přelomu let 1936 a 1937. Jako vítěz z nich vzešel jednodušší prototyp firmy Daimler-Benz vedený pod označením ZW neboli Zugführer Wagen (vozidlo velitele čety). Další osud neúspěšného prototypu MKA není znám, ale zřejmě dosloužil jako cvičné vozidlo.

Základní konstrukce prototypu Daimler-Benz byla shodná s tou od firmy Krupp. Podvozek sestával z pěti relativně velkých pojezdových kol s kruhovými odlehčovacími otvory a gumovou obručí po obvodu. Každé kolo bylo uchyceno i odpruženo samostatně. Vpředu se dále nacházelo rovněž perforované kolo hnací a zcela vzadu kolo napínací, obě zvednutá nad úroveň terénu. Shora dosedal pás na dvě podpůrné kladky s gumovou bandáží. Trup byl svařen a snýtován z rovných pancéřových desek o síle 14,5 mm. Pouze dno vany mělo tloušťku jen 5 mm.

Za samotnou čelní deskou podvozkové vany následovala rovná plošina, ve které se nalézaly průlezy řidiče a radisty, uzavřené dvoudílnými poklopy. Z této plošiny se zvedala čelní stěna nástavby. V její levé části byl odklopný průzor řidiče, v pravé potom korbový kulomet MG 34 ráže 7,92 mm uchycený v kruhovém střelišti. Kulomet obsluhoval radista sedící v trupu tanku hned vedle řidiče. Rovněž v obou bočních stěnách nástavby se nacházely odklopné průzory sloužící řidiči a radistovi k výhledu do stran.

Zbylí tři členové posádky, velitel, střelec a nabíječ, měli svá stanoviště ve věži. Věž byla umístěna na horní ploše nástavby zhruba v polovině délky celého stroje. V jejích bočních stěnách byly průlezy pro střelce a nabíječe, oba opatřené jednodílnými dvířky otvíranými do strany. Dvířka byla opatřena jednoduchými štěrbinovými průzory. Další dva průzory se nacházely na bocích věže před těmito dvířky. Tyto průzory byly stejného typu jako již zmíněné boční průzory řidiče a radisty. Daly se odklopit směrem nahoru pro lepší výhled. Během pobytu v bojové oblasti ale zůstávaly uzavřené a výhled zajišťovaly pouze štěrbiny v jejich krytech.

Ze zádi věže vystupovala část oblouku velitelské věžičky, pod kterou bylo stanoviště velitele tanku. Věžička měla po svém obvodu osm symetricky rozmístěných pozorovacích otvorů, kterými velitel sledoval okolí vozu. Po stranách tubusu velitelské věžičky byly v zadní stěně věže umístěny malé obdélníkové střílny pro ruční zbraně opatřené kryty. Tloušťka pancéřování věže činila 14,5 mm na všech stěnách kromě stropu, ten byl tlustý pouze 10 mm. Čelní stěna věže nesla ve vnějším úchytu hlavní zbraň tanku – kanon KwK 36 L/46,5 ráže 37 mm. Po jeho pravé straně se potom nacházely dva spřažené kulomety MG 34. Celková zásoba munice na palubě stroje činila 120 nábojů pro kanon a 4425 nábojů pro všechny tři kulomety.


Modules

Turrets

Engines

Suspensions

Radios

Compatible Equipment

Compatible Consumables

Player Opinion

Pros and Cons

  • Same DPM as Pz4H's 75mm gun. More DPM than the Hydrostat and the T-25
  • Good view range(for German med, "average" for tier)
  • High HP value
  • Good camouflage rating
  • Good gun depression
  • Very low ammo capacity, only 9 rounds more than the Turán III PT!
  • Worst gun handling of all tier 5 mediums. Vomit-inducing base accuracy for a fragile medium.
  • Poor top speed and acceleration, and terrible reverse speed
  • Poor all-around armor, HE will be the bane of this tank.
  • Mediocre standard shell penetration, will force you to use premium rounds to penetrate enemies semi-reliably.

Performance

A mediocre tank, the Panzer III K suffers quite a lot in comparison to other tier 5 medium tanks. It has quite poor armor, and is even worse than its tier 4 counterpart the Panzer III, at only 50mm at most except for the gun mantlet and the commander's cupola. While the tank has rather nice gun depression at 10 degrees, its gun mantlet is small and only covers a small portion of the turret, meaning most shots fired at a hull-down Panzer III K will penetrate. The tank is blessed with a large amount of HP at 790 hit points, so it can absorb a fair amount of shots before going down. It's mobility is also much worse than a standard Panzer III, and mediocre by tier 5 standards. Its above average average ground resistances aren't enough to make up for its weak engine and low top speed, leaving the tank outpaced by most other medium tanks, unless it is equipped with the new turbocharger equipment, even then it will still lag out a bit compared to its peers.

The tank does have a decent view range, but never attempt to spot enemies if you have no backups or a close escape route, as its mobility is rather lackluster. Sniping in this thing is a very iffy option, a practice in futility at best, due to the tank's horrendous gun handling values, which is the among the worst in the tier on paper, and practically the worst in its tier taking its dispersion penalty on the move into account. The gun also lacks in penetration, making dealing with higher tier opponents - which can include tier 7's due to its lack of preferential matchmaking - difficult without premium ammunition. As such, the Panzer III K is best played as more of a support tank than a contemporary medium like the DS PZInż, the T-34 or the M4, getting into ranges far enough to make sure that you won't get annihilated within 10 seconds, but close enough to make sure that your gun will work semi-reliably. Overall, a tank that you should not get unless you're used to bad gun handlings, and a Christmas gift for a clan member or a friend that you hate the most.


In the Anime

In Izetta the Last Witch, the Mk III saw combat during the invasion of Livonia and the Invasion of Thermidor much likes its real world counterpart. It also saw combat in the opening rounds of the Invasion of Eylstadt where it proved effective in breaking through the Eylstadt trenches.

The Mk III was also used during the Battle of Coenenburg where it fought Eylstadt Renault FT-17s with no casualties, and breaking through the first defensive at Coenenburg before being halted by accurate artillery strikes. However the Mk IIIs had no effect when fighting Izetta, most were thrown into the air and chalked up as mobility kills.


Panzerkampfwagen III

Panzerkampfwagen III — нямецкі сярэдні танк часоў Другой сусветнай вайны, які серыйна выпускаўся з 1938 па 1943 год. Скарочанымі назвамі гэтага танка з'яўляліся PzKpfw III, Panzer III, Pz III. У ведамасным рубрыкатары ваеннай тэхнікі нацысцкай Германіі гэты танк меў абазначэнне Sd.Kfz. 141 (Sonderkraftfahrzeuge 141 — машына спецыяльнага прызначэння 141). У савецкіх гістарычных дакументах і папулярнай літаратуры PzKpfw III называўся як «Тып 3», Т-III ці Т-3.

Panzerkampfwagen III
PzKpfw III Ausf. H
Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf. E
Тып сярэдні танк
Баявая маса, т 19,5
Кампанавальная схема маторнае аддзяленне ззаду, трансмісійнае спераду, баявое і кіравання пасярэдзіне
Экіпаж, чал. 5
Гісторыя
Гады распрацоўкі 1935-1937
Гады вытворчасці 1939—1943
Гады эксплуатацыі 1939—1945
Асноўныя аператары
Габарыты
Даўжыня, мм 5380
Шырыня, мм 2910
Вышыня, мм 2500
Дарожны прасвет, мм 385
Браніраванне
Тып брані стальная хроманікелевая катаная, паверхнева загартаваная
Лоб корпуса (верх), мм/град. 30 / 9°
Лоб корпуса (сярэдзіна), мм/град. 25 / 87°
Лоб корпуса (ніз), мм/град. 30 / 21—52° — 25 / 75°
Борт корпуса, мм/град. 30 / 0°
Кармы корпуса (верх), мм/град. 20 / 30°
Кармы корпуса (сярэдзіна), мм/град. 20 / 10°
Кармы корпуса (ніз), мм/град. 20 / 65°
Дах корпуса, мм 16 / 75—90°
Лоб вежы, мм/град. 30 / 15°
Борт вежы, мм/град. 30 / 25°
Дах вежы, мм 10 / 83—90°
Узбраенне
Калібр і марка гарматы 37-мм KwK 36, 50-мм KwK 38 / KwK 39, 75-мм KwK 37
Тып гарматы наразная
Даўжыня ствала, калібраў 46,5 / 42 / 60 / 24
Боекамплект гарматы 125
Вуглы ВН, град. -10…+20°
Прыцэлы тэлескапічны T.Z.F.5a
Рухомасць
Тып рухавіка V-падобны 12-цыліндравы карбюратарны вадкаснага ахаладжэння
Хуткасць па перасечанай мясцовасці, км/г <<<хуткасць па="" перасечанай="" мясцовасці="">>>
Тып падвескі індывідуальная тарсіённая, з гідраўлічнымі амартызатарамі

Гэтыя баявыя машыны выкарыстоўваліся вермахтам з першага дня Другой сусветнай вайны. Апошнія запісы пра баявое ўжыванне PzKpfw III у штатным саставе падраздзяленняў вермахта датуюцца сярэдзінай 1944 года, адзіночныя танкі ваявалі аж да капітуляцыі Германіі. З сярэдзіны 1941 да пачатку 1943 года PzKpfw III быў асновай бранетанкавых войскаў вермахта (панцэрвафэ) і, нягледзячы на адносную слабасць у параўнанні з сучаснымі яму танкамі краін антыгітлераўскай кааліцыі, унёс значны ўнёсак у поспехі вермахта таго перыяду. Танкі гэтага тыпу пастаўляліся арміям краін-саюзнікаў Германіі па Восі. Захопленыя PzKpfw III з добрымі вынікамі выкарыстоўваліся Чырвонай арміяй. На базе PzKpfw III у Германіі і СССР ствараліся самаходна-артылерыйскія ўстаноўкі (САУ) рознага прызначэння.


Modules

Turrets

Engines

Suspensions

Radios

Compatible Equipment

Compatible Consumables

Player Opinion

Pros and Cons

  • Great mobility: high acceleration and top speed
  • Jack-of-All-Trades, directly superior to Pz.IV H mounting the same 7,5cm L/48 gun
  • Hull armor is decently sloped, upper plate is thicker than some Tier 5 heavy tanks
  • Gun penetration vastly more reliable for picking off enemies, compared to the weaker 50mm L/60 at tier IV.
  • Spaced Turret armor is almost completely invulnerable to HEAT and reduces HE damage
  • Mediocre accuracy, somewhat difficult to hit distant targets
  • Large front mounted transmission compartment, prone to engine damage and de-tracking shots
  • Weak hull side and turret armor, can not angle effective
  • Turret is giant 50mm weak spot, although spaced armor screens can trick your enemies into shooting them and dealing no damage
  • Mediocre view range doesn't enable very effective active scouting

Performance

As in the page introduction, the Pz.Kpfw. III/IV is a somewhat unique tier 5 tank. It's somewhere between a flanker and a half-scout, combining high mobility, good acceleration, agility, and fairly powerful hull armor at the price of some glaring weaknesses. Notably these are mediocre accuracy, poor armor on hull sides and turret, also somewhat lacking alpha damage giving it a limited offensive capability. In terms of tactics, use the mobility to position yourself in vital spots in the map, such as cap points and on your enemies flanks, as long as you stay far back enough to be in cover with an escape route. Try to react and defend from cover or strike accurately from afar, rather than charging in and going on the offensive.

Firstly, mobility. first played with all modules stock you may be disappointed by its sloppy movement as it's a far cry from your Pz.Kpfw. III, but with a ridiculously strong top engine and upgraded suspension you will be able to outrun almost all non-scout tanks you will face. The best use for the high speed is popping around ridgelines, spotting the enemy for heavier guns and earn a few snap shots by yourself. Agility is excellent and well suited for circling, with unrivalled turret traverse speed, though it never hurts being vigilant of enemy reinforcements possibly planning to outflank you.

In terms of survivability, 80mm of sloped upper glacis armor is directly superior to 70mm on the PzKpfw III, though also facing opponents with bigger guns. The lower parts and sides left much to be desired, barely improved at 60mm and 30mm respectively. Size wise, the tank is rather tall and has mediocre camouflage. If you can add your own angling into the mix, you might get a Steel Wall achievement by luck. Also note that a large portion of your hull side is not covered by spaced armor, so one hit from 105 mm howitzer there will probably cripple you.

The gun is one of the most notable issues of Pz.Kpwf. III/IV. It can't mount a 105 mm howitzer like Pz.Kpfw. IV or M4 Sherman, and 7,5cms' are not really impressive, with mediocre accuracy, penetration and acceptable RoF. If you are putting it to use, better avoid long-range engagements for preservance of ammunition. Usually if you utilize your assets right, you will still come out on top of duels (ie due to the armour and agility). In a solo engagement, peek around corners with angled armor, and get up close and personal and force them to rotate helplessly in place and abuse their slower reload.

It is advised to go for the suspension before anything else, because the stock one has pitiful traverse speed and terrain resistance even with top engine mounted. Be aware that the upgraded gun has marginal amounts of penetration and accuracy over the stock gun, and isn't necessarily the first choice for research. Additionally, the turret gives you a good bit of health, so this will increase your overall survivability and will also probably be more useful than going straight for the gun.

Crew skills are advised to focus on maximising the already outstanding mobility, as well as compensating the mediocre spotting capability and firepower efficiency. The loader who cannot help with that can take Safe Stowage to prevent ammo rack damage from weak sides (or repairs if you tend not to take large hits). GLD, Optics, and Gun Rammer are good equipment to help those two traits respectively - the optics especially is a must for the next tank, the VK 3001D.


BILLY BOWLEGS III HAD A NAME WITH HISTORY

Some Seminoles used English-sounding names. Sometimes they took on the last names of white men as a sign of honor. Other times, white men made up names for them.

The name "Billy Bowlegs" was a little of each, and the Bowlegs legacy spanned three generations.

The first Bowlegs was the Seminole leader Bolek, sometimes spelled Boleck or Bolechs.

Maj. Gen. O.O. Howard's early 1900s book Famous Indian Chiefs I Have Known suggests that the original Bowlegs got his name because he ridden Spanish horses so much as a child that his legs bowed. His father nicknamed him Piernas Curvas, meaning curved legs. It was later expanded to Guillermito a las Piernas Curvas or Little Willie of the Bowed Legs.

The other version is that he took his name from a white man named Bolek, a trader from the era when British merchants and ship captains established trading posts in Spanish Florida.

The first Bowlegs was the brother of King Payne, for whom Paynes Prairie, the open land south of Gainesville, gets its name. The brothers were early Seminole royalty of the Snake clan. Both were chiefs who blocked Georgians from com-

This is the last of three columns on Billy Bowlegs III. Today: The Bowlegs legacy. ing into Spanish Florida and capturing fleeing African slaves in the early 1800s. When King Payne died about 1812, his brother became the chief who would resist Andrew Jackson's invasion of Florida, which touched off the first of three Seminole wars and forced Spain to give up Florida.

The second Bowlegs was the Seminole legend of the last of the wars, the one sometimes called the Billy Bowlegs War. This one started after a decade of relative peace when rowdy soldiers stole bananas and squashed pumpkins in Bowlegs' garden. Bowlegs, a resistance leader, had became a peacekeeper at a time when Secretary of War Jefferson Davis, who would later become the Confederacy's president, began pressing the Army for a more aggressive policy to rid the state of its tribes.

When Army engineers on a surveying excursion trashed the chief's garden, Bowlegs sought money and an apology. They laughed at him. Billy Bowlegs' response was quick and decisive. Just before dawn one day in December 1855, the chief led an attack on the engineers' camp. Two men were killed and four others were wounded. The bloodshed prompted two years of skirmishes, marked mostly by Seminole raids on pioneer settlements and clashes with Army troops and militia.

Billy Bowlegs II's surrender in 1858 ended the Seminole wars in Florida. He was sent west to Arkansas territory, but 100 or more Seminoles remained in Florida, including many of his relatives.

Like his namesake, Billy Bowlegs III tended his garden.

"His camp is surrounded with patches of sweet potatoes, cassava, sugar cane and pumpkins which he still tends," writes George Albert DeVane in DeVane's Early Florida History.

Seminoles were often known by many names, one from birth, another during their childhood and a third once they matured. Billy Bowlegs III's birth name was Mo-pee-fah-gee. In his youth he was called Cho-fee-hadjo, meaning rabbit, sometimes spelled Co-fee-hat-co or Cofehatke.

At a Green Corn Dance when he was 15, Cho-fee-hadjo was renamed Billy Bowlegs III.

"Billy was one of the band headed by Captain Tom Tiger, who met the first train to arrive in Kissimmee City[ in 1882). By pre- arrangements of Mr. Plant and to the amusement of his guests, Captain Tom Tiger gave the war whoop."

Billy also watched the unloading of a train engine from the steamer White City at Jupiter. The engine pulled the train over the Celestial Railroad from Jupiter to Venus and Mars. (Venus is on the east side of Lake Okeechobee, but Mars is no longer marked for Florida maps.)

When Flagler's first train reached Palm Beach, Billy was there.

When Billy was 100 years old, DeVane joined him for the Seminole's first airplane ride. A few turns into the flight, Billy was enjoying the view when DeVane asked him how he was doing, "Billy answered, 'Fine, fly like a bird."'


An Appeal to Heaven Flag

During the early days of the War for Independence—while the gun smoke still covered the fields at Lexington and Concord, and the cannons still echoed at Bunker Hill—America faced innumerable difficulties and a host of hard decisions. Unsurprisingly, the choice of a national flag remained unanswered for many months due to more pressing issues such as arranging a defense and forming the government.

However, a flag was still needed by the military in order to differentiate the newly forged American forces from those of the oncoming British. Several temporary flags were swiftly employed in order to satisfy the want. One of the most famous and widespread standards rushed up flagpoles on both land and sea was the “Pinetree Flag,” or sometimes called “An Appeal to Heaven” flag.

As the name suggests, this flag was characterized by having both a tree (most commonly thought to be a pine or a cypress) and the motto reading “an appeal to Heaven.” Typically, these were displayed on a white field, and often were used by troops, especially in New England, as the liberty tree was a prominent northern symbol for the independence movement.[i]

In fact, prior to the Declaration of Independence but after the opening of hostilities, the Pinetree Flag was one of the most popular flags for American troops. Indeed, “there are recorded in the history of those days many instances of the use of the pine-tree flag between October, 1775, and July, 1776.”[ii]

Some of America’s earliest battles and victories were fought under a banner declaring “an appeal to Heaven.” Some historians document that General Israel Putnam’s troops at Bunker Hill used a flag with the motto on it, and during the Battle of Boston the floating batteries (floating barges armed with artillery) proudly flew the famous white Pinetree Flag.[iii] In January of 1776, Commodore Samuel Tucker flew the flag while successfully capturing a British troop transport which was attempting to relieve the besieged British forces in Boston.[iv]

The Pinetree Flag was commonly used by the Colonial Navy during this period of the War. When George Washington commissioned the first-ever officially sanctioned military ships for America in 1775, Colonel Joseph Reed wrote the captains asking them to:

Please to fix upon some particular color for a flag, and a signal by which our vessels may know one another. What do you think of a flag with a white ground, a tree in the middle, the motto ‘Appeal to Heaven’? This is the flag of our floating batteries.[v]

In the following months news spread even to England that the Americans were employing this flag on their naval vessels. A report of a captured ship revealed that, “the flag taken from a provincial [American] privateer is now deposited in the admiralty the field is a white bunting, with a spreading green tree the motto, ‘Appeal to Heaven.’”[vi]

As the skirmishes unfolded into all out warfare between the colonists and England, the Pinetree Flag with its prayer to God became synonymous with the American struggle for liberty. An early map of Boston reflected this by showing a side image of a British redcoat trying to rip this flag out of the hands of a colonist (see image on right).[vii] The main motto, “An Appeal to Heaven,” inspired other similar flags with mottos such as “An Appeal to God,” which also often appeared on early American flags.

For many modern Americans it might be surprising to learn that one of the first national mottos and flags was “an appeal to Heaven.” Where did this phrase originate, and why did the Americans identify themselves with it?

To understand the meaning behind the Pinetree Flag we must go back to John Locke’s influential Second Treatise of Government (1690). In this book, the famed philosopher explains that when a government becomes so oppressive and tyrannical that there no longer remains any legal remedy for citizens, they can appeal to Heaven and then resist that tyrannical government through a revolution. Locke turned to the Bible to explain his argument:

To avoid this state of war (wherein there is no appeal but to Heaven, and wherein every the least difference is apt to end, where there is no authority to decide between the contenders) is one great reason of men’s putting themselves into society and quitting [leaving] the state of nature, for where there is an authority—a power on earth—from which relief can be had by appeal, there the continuance of the state of war is excluded and the controversy is decided by that power. Had there been any such court—any superior jurisdiction on earth—to determine the right between Jephthah and the Ammonites, they had never come to a state of war, but we see he was forced to appeal to Heaven. The Lord the Judge (says he) he judge this day between the children of Israel and the children of Ammon, Judg. xi. 27.[viii]

Locke affirms that when societies are formed and systems and methods of mediation can be instituted, armed conflict to settle disputes is a last resort. When there no longer remains any higher earthly authority to which two contending parties (such as sovereign nations) can appeal, the only option remaining is to declare war in assertion of certain rights. This is what Locke calls an appeal to Heaven because, as in the case of Jephthah and the Ammonites, it is God in Heaven Who ultimately decides who the victors will be.

Locke goes on to explain that when the people of a country “have no appeal on earth, then they have a liberty to appeal to Heaven whenever they judge the cause of sufficient moment [importance].”[ix] However, Locke cautions that appeals to Heaven through open war must be seriously and somberly considered beforehand since God is perfectly just and will punish those who take up arms in an unjust cause. The English statesman writes that:

he that appeals to Heaven must be sure he has right on his side and a right to that is worth the trouble and cost of the appeal as he will answer at a tribunal that cannot be deceived [God’s throne] and will be sure to retribute to everyone according to the mischiefs he hath created to his fellow subjects that is, any part of mankind.[x]

The fact that Locke writes extensively concerning the right to a just revolution as an appeal to Heaven becomes massively important to the American colonists as England begins to strip away their rights. The influence of his Second Treatise of Government (which contains his explanation of an appeal to Heaven) on early America is well documented. During the 1760s and 1770s, the Founding Fathers quoted Locke more than any other political author, amounting to a total of 11% and 7% respectively of all total citations during those formative decades.[xi] Indeed, signer of the Declaration of Independence Richard Henry Lee once quipped that the Declaration had been largely“copied from Locke’s Treatise on Government.”[xii]

Therefore, when the time came to separate from Great Britain and the regime of King George III, the leaders and citizens of America well understood what they were called upon to do. By entering into war with their mother country, which was one of the leading global powers at the time, the colonists understood that only by appealing to Heaven could they hope to succeed.

For example, Patrick Henry closes his infamous “give me liberty” speech by declaring that:

If we wish to be free—if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon—we must fight!—I repeat it, sir, we must fight!! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts, is all that is left us![xiii]

Furthermore, Jonathan Trumbull, who as governor of Connecticut was the only royal governor to retain his position after the Declaration, explained that the Revolution began only after repeated entreaties to the King and Parliament were rebuffed and ignored. In writing to a foreign leader, Trumbull clarified that:

On the 19 th day of April, 1775, the scene of blood was opened by the British troops, by the unprovoked slaughter of the Provincial troops at Lexington and Concord. The adjacent Colonies took up arms in their own defense and the Congress again met, again petitioned the Throne [the English king] for peace and settlement and again their petitions were contemptuously disregarded. When every glimpse of hope failed not only of justice but of safety, we were compelled, by the last necessity, to appeal to Heaven and rest the defense of our liberties and privileges upon the favor and protection of Divine Providence and the resistance we could make by opposing force to force.[xiv]

John Locke’s explanation of the right to just revolution permeated American political discourse and influenced the direction the young country took when finally being forced to appeal to Heaven in order to reclaim their unalienable rights. The church pulpits likewise thundered with further Biblical exegesis on the importance of appealing to God for an ultimate redress of grievances, and pastors for decades after the War continued to teach on the subject. For example, an 1808 sermon explained:

War has been called an appeal to Heaven. And when we can, with full confidence, make the appeal, like David, and ask to be prospered according to our righteousness, and the cleanness of our hands, what strength and animation it gives us! When the illustrious Washington, at an early stage of our revolutionary contest, committed the cause in that solemn manner. “May that God whom you have invoked, judge between us and you,” how our hearts glowed that we had such a cause to commit![xv]

Thus, when the early militiamen and naval officers flew the Pinetree Flag emblazoned with its motto “An Appeal for Heaven,” it was not some random act with little significance or meaning. Instead, they sought to march into battle with a recognition of God’s Providence and their reliance on the King of Kings to right the wrongs which they had suffered. The Pinetree Flag represents a vital part of America’s history and an important step on the journey to reaching a national flag during the early days of the War for Independence.

Furthermore, the Pinetree Flag was far from being the only national symbol recognizing America’s reliance on the protection and Providence of God. During the War for Independence other mottos and rallying cries included similar sentiments. For example, the flag pictured on the right bore the phrase “Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God,” which came from an earlier 1750 sermon by the influential Rev. Jonathan Mayhew. [xvi] In 1776 Benjamin Franklin even suggested that this phrase be part of the nation’s Great Seal.[xvii] The Americans’ thinking and philosophy was so grounded on a Biblical perspective that even a British parliamentary report in 1774 acknowledged that, “If you ask an American, ‘Who is his master?’ He will tell you he has none—nor any governor but Jesus Christ.” [xviii]

This God-centered focus continued throughout our history after the Revolutionary War. For example, in the War of 1812 against Britain, during the Defense of Fort McHenry, Francis Scott Key penned what would become our National Anthem, encapsulating this perspective by writing that:

Blest with vict’ry and peace may the heav’n rescued land

Praise the power that hath made and preserv’d us a nation!

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,

And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”[xix]

In the Civil War, Union Forces sang this song when marching into battle. In fact, Abraham Lincoln was inspired to put “In God we Trust” on coins, which was one of his last official acts before his untimely death.[xx] And after World War II, President Eisenhower led Congress in making “In God We Trust” the official National Motto,[xxi] also adding “under God” to the pledge in 1954.[xxii]

Throughout the centuries America has continually and repeatedly acknowledged the need to look to God and appeal to Heaven. This was certainly evident in the earliest days of the War for Independence with the Pinetree Flag and its powerful inscription: “An Appeal to Heaven.”

[i] “Flag, The,” Cyclopaedia of Political Science, Political Economy, and of the Political History of the United States, ed. John Lalor (Chicago: Melbert B. Cary & Company, 1883), 2.232, here.

[ii] Report of the Proceedings of the Society of the Army of the Tennessee at the Thirtieth Meeting, Held at Toledo, Ohio, October 26-17, 1898 (Cincinnati: F. W. Freeman, 1899), 80, here.

[iii] Schuyler Hamilton, Our National Flag The Stars and Stripes Its History in a Century (New York: George R. Lockwood, 1877), 16-17, here

[iv] Report of the Proceedings of the Society of the Army of the Tennessee at the Thirtieth Meeting, Held at Toledo, Ohio, October 26-17, 1898 (Cincinnati: F. W. Freeman, 1899), 80, here.

[v] Richard Frothingham, History of the Siege of Boston, and of the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and Buner Hill (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1849), 261, here.

[vi] Richard Frothingham, History of the Siege of Boston, and of the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and Buner Hill (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1849), 262, here.

[vii] Richard Frothingham, History of the Siege of Boston, and of the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and Buner Hill (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1849), 262, here.

[viii] John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (London: A. Millar, et al., 1794), 211, here.

[ix] John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (London: A. Millar, et al., 1794), 346-347, here

[x] John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (London: A. Millar, et al., 1794), 354-355, here.

[xi] Donald Lutz, The Origins of American Constitutionalism (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1988), 143.

[xii] Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XV, p. 462, to James Madison on August 30, 1823.

[xiii] William Wirt, The Life of Patrick Henry (New York: McElrath & Bangs, 1831), 140, here

[xiv] Jonathan Trumbull quoted in James Longacre, The National Portrait Gallery of Distinguished Americans (Philadelphia: James B. Longacre, 1839), 4.5, here.

[xv] The Question of War with Great Britain, Examined upon Moral and Christian Principles (Boston: Snelling and Simons, 1808), 13, here.

[xvi] Jonathan Mayhew, A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers (Boston: D. Fowle, 1750) [Evans # 6549] see also, John Adams, Letters of John Adams, Addressed to His Wife, ed. Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1841), 1:152, to Abigail Adams on August 14, 1776.

[xvii] “Benjamin Franklin’s Great Seal Design,” The Great Seal (accessed September 2, 2020), here.

[xviii] Hezekiah Niles, Principles and Acts of the Revolution in America (Baltimore: William Ogden Niles, 1822), 198.

[xix] Francis Scott Key, “The Defence of Fort M’Henry,” The Analectic Magazine (Philadelphia: Moses Thomas, 1814) 4.433-444.

[xx] B. F. Morris, Memorial Record of the Nation’s Tribute to Abraham Lincoln (Washington, DC: W. H. & O. H. Morrison, 1866), 216, here.

[xxi] D. Jason Berggan, “In God We Trust,” The First Amendment Encyclopedia (2017), here.

[xxii] Rachel Siegel, “The Gripping Sermon that Got ‘Under God’ Added to the Pledge of Allegiance on Flag Day,” The Washington Post (June 14, 2018), here.



Comments:

  1. Gardazilkree

    It also worries me about this issue. Tell me, please - where can I find more information on this topic?

  2. Torg

    depending on the nature of the work

  3. Zugul

    Thank you for an explanation. I did not know that.

  4. Aviva

    Safe answer)

  5. Sherman

    I agree

  6. Ingalls

    As usual, the webmaster has published it correctly!

  7. Cairbre

    In my opinion, you are wrong. I'm sure. Let's discuss this. Email me at PM.



Write a message