Alexander Matrosov aka Shakiryan Mukhametyanov: Why are there so many inconsistencies in the biography of a war hero

2024 Author: Richard Flannagan | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-15 23:55

For some, the name Alexander Matrosov is associated with an unforgettable feat, for others with inexplicable sacrifice. In Russian history, there are fewer and fewer heroes who would not have undergone a reassessment of values, and this fate has not escaped the boy who sacrificed his life for the sake of a common cause. His military fate was short and, despite the heroism and memory of his descendants, it was rather bitter. Yes, and the previous, pre-war life did not spoil the boy. Who was Matrosov before the war and who raised the hero and why is his biography full of inconsistencies?

As soon as they did not try to remake Matrosov's biography, accusing him of a criminal past (and when did he only manage?), Of desertion (hardly people running away from service try to close the bunker with their breasts), and even the fact that no Alexander Matrosov existed at all …

The feat of Alexander Matrosov - what it was

Everyone knows what happened on the battlefield at the moment when Matrosov decided to sacrifice his life, but the detailed circumstances that make this story very characterizing the hero are rather poorly disseminated information.

In February 1943, Matrosov was placed at the disposal of the 2nd rifle battalion of the 91st volunteer brigade. In mid-February, the brigade retreats, Matrosov dies on February 27, and after that day, the positions of the rivals change. The battalion goes on the attack, and that there are three machine guns in the enemy position. So, getting close to the enemy line is almost impossible. This means that the events of the day when the sailors died were turning points for this territory and this battalion.

The Soviet side sends fighters to eliminate three bunkers, but it is 1943, there are already fighters with serious combat experience, therefore we are not talking about the fact that people were thrown to certain death. Rather, they were entrusted with a task with which the fighters had to cope. And they coped, however, only Matrosov went down in history, thanks to the level of sacrifice that he was ready to show in order to achieve the goal.

The Germans prepared the defense diligently, according to the classical principle: three bunkers were located so as not to create "dead zones" for enemy shelling. Such a checkerboard arrangement made it possible to create a terrain with a complex relief. Bunkers - a firing point, which is made of wood and earth, is built quickly, and, as a rule, they were dug into the ground - a natural elevation. Fortified with logs and black earth. A reliable and strong door was installed on the back side so that the machine gunner was protected from the back from enemy attack.

There was ventilation in the ceiling of such a structure, weapons, firing, could fill a small structure with smoke. The Soviet battalion did not have powerful weapons, or tanks, nothing to be able to hit the bunkers from a long distance. Therefore, the only possible decision is made - to divert attention with fire, and send a group to destroy the bunkers.

Sharipov, Galimov and Ogurtsov, as some of the most experienced and reliable fighters, were chosen to destroy the firing positions. Ogurtsov got the most difficult position, so a young and nimble Matrosov was appointed to his assistant. The last, we recall, at that time was only the third day at the front. Therefore, it is extremely doubtful that the command chose him, most likely 19-year-old Sasha himself was eager to fight. Or he possessed the necessary qualities for the commander to believe in his strength.

Sharipov was the first to reach his position, and through the ventilation system he shot the machine gunners. The bunker was under the control of the Soviet side. Sharipov fought from an occupied firing position. Galimov used anti-tank weapons and also took possession of his point. Galimov had to actively fight off the attempts of the Germans to seize the bunker back. But the third, central bunker spoiled the whole picture and did not allow the battalion to be led into the attack. Ogurtsov was wounded on the outskirts of the site. The sailors went alone.

Despite the lack of sufficient combat experience, Matrosov, according to the same Ogurtsov, acted quite competently: he crawled to the bunker as close as possible and threw a grenade. If the throw was perfect and hit right on target, then this would be sufficient to eliminate the group, but given that there was a dense shelling at that time, it was simply impossible to crank it out. The grenade operation failed.

But the grenade somewhat stunned the machine gunner, the fire stopped and then the battalion rose to attack and then the fire resumed. For a battalion, whose fighters have already left their places of shelter, this would mean certain death. It was then that Matrosov, saving his comrades, closed the bunker with himself.

But here questions arise. It is almost impossible to close the embrasure with anything, initially it is installed so that it will not be blocked during shelling, that is, high enough. If a person, standing on the ground, tries to close the embrasure with himself, then such an obstacle will definitely not be enough for a long time, if only because the wounded fighter would not be able to hold the body at the firing point and would fall. Or the body would have been thrown aside by the shock wave in the very first minutes, taking into account the number of shots and the speed of movement.

It is believed that Matrosov closed not the embrasure with himself, but the very ventilation. For example, he climbed on top of a structure in order to shoot the enemy from a hole, but was shot and fell right into the ventilation. Then the machine gunners would have been forced to open the door - and there was crossfire. In any case, it was Matrosov's actions, which cost him his life and on which he decided without a shadow of a doubt, that allowed the battalion to switch from retreat to attack.

The names of three other soldiers who also took part in this operation are not on Matrosov's award list. And Matrosov himself was far from the only one who committed a similar act. However, it was his name that became the personification of feat and fearlessness. According to official information, over two hundred similar feats were recorded for the entire war period. Moreover, Matrosov was not the first. Mikhail Lukyanenko did exactly the same, and won literally a few seconds, but they were enough for the attack to be successful.

Shakiryan or, after all, Alexander?

In the Uchalinsky district of the Republic of Bashkortostan there is a small but picturesque village of Kunakbaevo. It is especially noteworthy for the fact that in its very center, and even along the highway, there is a park in memory of the fallen soldiers, the central place in which is occupied by the monument to the Hero of the USSR Alexander Matrosov. However, Matrosov is known here as Shakiryan Mukhametyanov, a local Kunakbaev guy and a hero of the USSR. And that is why they are especially honored, regularly updating the monument, caring for the park, and most importantly, telling their children about the feat of an ordinary boy - their fellow countryman.

And the point is not that the locals want to be closer to something great, but that it is important for the Bashkirs to know and honor the memory of their kind, of which Shakiryan is a part. In order to restore historical justice, the Bashkir side spent a lot of time and effort.

So where did Alexander Matrosov come from if there was Shakiryan Mukhametyanov? After all, allegedly Matrosov was born in Dnepropetrovsk, lived in an aunt's family (parents died during the revolution), worked as a turner. In Dnepropetrovsk, they think that way, there is a museum named after Matrosov and there is no talk of any Shakiryan there.

There are also historical objects at the place of the hero's death, but there are no documents there either, which would confirm that Alexander was Alexander. The documents remained only in military units. It was the museum workers who brought to the world the version about Shakiryan - the Kunakbaevsky guy, which is the most believable today. The museum staff thoroughly studied all the documents related to the hero, but it was the photographs that made it possible to reveal new circumstances.

In the 50s, one of the residents of Kunakbaevo recognized his fellow countryman in Matrosov's photograph, the others, who had witnessed the previous events, agreed with the similarity of the guy from the photo with a boy from their village. Bashkir writers Anvar Bikchentaev and Rauf Nasyrov joined in. By that time, there were still those who remembered Shakiryan's family, knew him as a boy.

Then a completely different series of events began to recover, revealing the completely difficult fate of the future hero. Shakiryan was born the fourth child in the family, on the day he went to school, they were photographed as a keepsake. It is unlikely that at that time someone had guessed that this shot would be of great historical value and help restore justice.

In the 30s, the boy's mother dies, the father could not independently cope with the children, the household and the grief that fell on him. Children are left unattended. Then the youngest member of the family is sent to an orphanage in the Ulyanovsk region. It is likely that this circumstance saves his life. After a couple of years, he was transferred to the Ivanovo orphanage, and during the translation there was a confusion with the surname. It was at that time that he became Alexander Matrosov. Surely he already remembered his name and surname, but when you are alone, without family and relatives, it is probably easier to live in the Ivanovo region by Alexander, and not by Shakiryan. He became a sailor thanks to the nickname, they began to call him a sailor even in the first orphanage. The reasons for the nickname are not clear. Perhaps this is due to the similarity with his real name, or maybe he just wore a vest.

During his childhood in an orphanage, Sasha-Shakiryan had the opportunity to come to his native village for the summer, according to the recollections of fellow villagers, then he asked to call himself Sasha. The memories of the villagers are recorded and documented. Allegedly, it was they who became the reason for the examination at the official level in order to determine the identity of Alexander Matrosov.

The examination was carried out on the basis of photographs of Shakiryan - a first-grader and Alexander from military documents. A forensic examination that compared the photographs confirmed that the photographs depict the same person, but at different ages. Thus, the fact that Alexander Matrosov is Shakiryan Mukhametyanov, a native of the village of Kunakbaevo, Uchalinsky district, can be considered proven.

About the life and bitter fate of the future hero

Life in an orphanage was certainly hard and full of hardships. A real struggle for life, in which Shakiryan was able to become a winner. After the end of the seven-year plan, the young guy is sent to work at the plant. He could not work there and fled, after being caught he was sent to a children's labor colony. And apparently it was this moment of his biography that the descendants considered sufficient to accuse him of almost a criminal past.

However, it is from this institution that he is drafted into the army, but first he enters the infantry school. Talent and skill were clearly noticed in the boy. The criminal element would not be so cherished and invested in its education, given that the country was already at war. There he joined the ranks of the Komsomol.

Shakiryan did not have time to graduate from an educational institution, the country needed fighters and he was sent to the ranks of the red army. A person who studied at a military school was treated with respect at the front (it was not for nothing that he was entrusted with a dangerous mission). Why, then, in the fate of Matrosov, which was quite in the spirit of the times, but at the same time, there was nothing that would not fit into the framework of Soviet perception of the heroes, was it rewritten up and down?

Comrade Stalin found out about Matrosov's heroic deed, he personally ordered him to be awarded the title of Hero of the USSR, documents must be prepared at lightning speed. After all, the Matrosov case was supposed to become an exemplary example, to raise morale in the army. It was then that the officials in a hurry concocted a biography of the hero, based on small documents sent from the school. It was decided to remain silent about the orphanage, the escape from the factory and the labor colony. In addition, the hero did not have relatives, no one would care for the accuracy of the information, and the comrades in arms did not even have time to get to know him properly, let alone ask him about life.

Leonid Lukov, the director of the film "Two Soldiers", made a huge contribution to the fictional story, of course, beautiful, tragic and patriotic. The film was based on the official version, which was embellished by the scriptwriters, the director, details and nuances were added that even Shakiryan turned into an experienced fighter. This is not to say that the film is bad. It is filmed perfectly and performs all the functions assigned to it - the viewer is moved, full of patriotic feelings. And what about fiction, then the film is a fiction, not a documentary - so what questions can there be?

So what difference does it make who the hero was? Shakiryan or Alexander, if the significance of his act is not assessed by his nationality. Like him Sashki, Ivans perished alongside the Anvars and Shamsutdins for a common cause and a common homeland. And they are all heroes, heroes and winners. The inhabitants of a small Bashkir village acted nobly and correctly, on the one hand, returning the hero to his roots, and on the other hand, indicating on the monument the name with which he became known, which he himself adopted.

And it is no longer so important that attempts to unearth new facts, denigrate or belittle the hero's deed occur with enviable frequency. And this applies not only to Matrosov, but also to many others. But does the fact that someone is not so praised as national heroes belittles the act of the same Lukyanov, who was the first to close the bunker? Of course not.

Heroism is not a bargaining chip for history. And if someone had a hand in defeating fascism to a greater or lesser extent, then that is exactly what he deserves to be called.