Mikhail Vasilyevich Frunze - revolutionary figure, Bolshevik, military leader of the Red Army, participant in the Civil War, theorist of military disciplines.
Mikhail was born on January 21 (old style) 1885 in the city of Pishpek (Bishkek) in the family of paramedic Vasily Mikhailovich Frunze, a Moldovan by nationality. The boy’s father, after graduating from a Moscow medical school, was sent for army service to Turkestan, where he remained. Mikhail's mother, Mavra Efimovna Bochkareva, a peasant by birth, was born in the Voronezh province. Her family moved to Turkmenistan in the mid-19th century.
Mikhail had an older brother, Konstantin, and three younger sisters - Lyudmila, Claudia and Lydia. All Frunze children studied at the Verny gymnasium (now the city of Almaty). The eldest children, Konstantin, Mikhail and Claudia, received gold medals after graduating from the secondary level. Mikhail continued his studies at the St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute, where he entered in 1904. Already in the first semester, he became interested in revolutionary ideas and joined the Social Democratic Labor Party, where he joined the Bolsheviks.
In November 1904, Frunze was arrested for participating in a provocative action. During the Manifestation on January 9, 1905 in St. Petersburg, he was wounded in the arm. Having dropped out of school, Mikhail Frunze fled from persecution by the authorities to Moscow, and then to Shuya, where he led a strike of textile workers in May of the same year. I met Frunze in 1906, when he was hiding in Stockholm. Mikhail had to hide his real name during the organization of the underground movement in Ivanovo-Voznesensk. The young party member was known under the pseudonyms Comrade Arseny, Trifonich, Mikhailov, Vasilenko.
Under the leadership of Frunze, the first Council of Workers' Deputies was created, which distributed leaflets with anti-government content. Frunze led city rallies and seized weapons. Mikhail was not afraid to use terrorist methods of struggle.
The young revolutionary stood at the head of an armed uprising in Moscow on Presnya, seized the Shuya printing house with the use of weapons, and attacked police officer Nikita Perlov with the aim of murder. In 1910, he received a death sentence, which, at the request of members of the public, as well as the writer V.G. Korolenko was replaced by hard labor.
Four years later, Frunze was sent to permanent residence in the village of Manzurku Irkutsk province, from where he fled to Chita in 1915. Under the name Vasilenko, he worked for some time in the local publication “Transbaikal Review”. Having changed his passport to Mikhailov, he moved to Belarus, where he got a job as a statistician in the Zemsky Union Committee on the Western Front.
The purpose of Frunze’s stay in the Russian army was to spread revolutionary ideas among the military. In Minsk, Mikhail Vasilyevich headed an underground cell. Over time, Frunze gained a reputation among the Bolsheviks as a specialist in paramilitary actions.
Revolution
At the beginning of March 1917, Mikhail Frunze prepared the seizure of the armed police department of Minsk by squads of ordinary workers. The archives of the detective department, weapons and ammunition of the station, several government agencies. After the success of the operation, Mikhail Frunze was appointed temporary chief of the Minsk police. Under Frunze's leadership, the publication of party newspapers began. In August, the military man was transferred to Shuya, where Frunze took the post of chairman of the Council of People's Deputies, the District Zemstvo Government and the City Council.
Mikhail Frunze met the revolution in Moscow at the barricades near the Metropol Hotel. Two months later, the revolutionary received the post of head of the party cell of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk province. Frunze was also involved in the affairs of the military commissariat. Civil war allowed Mikhail Vasilyevich to fully demonstrate the military abilities that he acquired during his revolutionary activities.
From February 1919, Frunze took command of the 4th Army of the Red Army, which managed to stop the attack on Moscow and launch a counter-offensive on the Urals. After such a significant victory of the Red Army, Frunze received the Order of the Red Banner.
Often the general could be seen on horseback at the head of the army, which allowed him to form a positive reputation among the Red Army soldiers. In June 1919, Frunze received a shell shock near Ufa. In July, Mikhail Vasilyevich headed the Eastern Front, but a month later received a task in the southern direction, the zone of which included Turkestan and the territory of Akhtuba. Until September 1920, Frunze carried out successful operations along the front line.
Frunze repeatedly gave guarantees of preserving the lives of those counter-revolutionaries who were ready to go over to the side of the Reds. Mikhail Vladimirovich promoted a humane attitude towards prisoners, which caused discontent among higher ranks.
In the fall of 1920, the Reds began a systematic offensive against the army, which was located in the Crimea and Northern Tavria. After the defeat of the Whites, Frunze’s detachments attacked their former comrades - the brigades of Batka, Yuri Tyutyunnik and. During the Crimean battles, Frunze was wounded. In 1921 he joined the Central Committee of the RCP(b). At the end of 1921, Frunze went on a political visit to Turkey. The communication of the Soviet general with the Turkish leader Mustafa Kemal Ataturk made it possible to strengthen Turkish-Soviet ties.
After the revolution
In 1923, at the October plenum of the Central Committee, where the distribution of forces between the three leaders (Zinoviev and Kamenev) was determined, Frunze supported the latter, making a report against Trotsky’s activities. Mikhail Vasilyevich blamed the People's Commissar for Military Affairs for the collapse of the Red Army and the lack of a clear system for training military personnel. On Frunze’s initiative, the Trotskyists Antonov-Ovseyenko and Sklyansky were removed from high military ranks. Frunze's line was supported by the Chief of the General Staff of the Red Army.
In 1924, Mikhail Frunze went from deputy chief to chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR and People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, and became a candidate member of the Politburo of the Central Committee and the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP (b). Mikhail Frunze also headed the headquarters of the Red Army and the Military Academy of the Red Army.
Frunze's main merit during this period can be considered the implementation of military reform, the purpose of which was to reduce the size of the Red Army and reorganize the command staff. Frunze introduced unity of command, a territorial system of division of troops, and participated in the creation of two independent structures within the Soviet Army - a standing army and mobile police units.
At this time, Frunze developed a military theory, which he outlined in a number of publications - “Unified Military Doctrine and the Red Army”, “Military-Political Education of the Red Army”, “Front and Rear in the War of the Future”, “Lenin and the Red Army”, “Our military construction and the tasks of the Military Scientific Society."
Over the next decade, thanks to Frunze’s efforts, airborne and tank troops, new artillery and automatic weapons appeared in the Red Army, and methods of providing logistical support to troops were developed. Mikhail Vasilyevich managed to stabilize the situation in the Red Army in a short time. Theoretical development of tactics and strategy for combat in conditions imperialist war, laid down by Frunze, were fully realized during the Second World War.
Personal life
Nothing is known about the personal life of the Red military leader before the revolution. Mikhail Frunze married only after 30 years the daughter of a Narodnaya Volya member, Sofya Alekseevna Popova. In 1920, a daughter, Tatyana, was born into the family, and three years later, a son, Timur. After the death of their parents, the children were taken in by their grandmother. When my grandmother passed away, my brother and sister ended up in the family of a friend of Mikhail Vasilyevich -.
After graduating from school, Timur entered the Flight School and served as a fighter pilot during the war. Died at the age of 19 in the sky over the Novgorod region. Posthumously awarded the title of Hero Soviet Union. Daughter Tatyana graduated from the Institute of Chemical Technology and worked in the rear during the war. She married Lieutenant General Anatoly Pavlov, with whom she gave birth to two children - son Timur and daughter Elena. The descendants of Mikhail Frunze live in Moscow. My granddaughter is studying chemistry.
Death and rumors of murder
In the fall of 1925, Mikhail Frunze turned to doctors for treatment of a stomach ulcer. The general was scheduled for a simple operation, after which Frunze died suddenly on October 31. The official cause of the general’s death was blood poisoning; according to the unofficial version, Stalin contributed to Frunze’s death.
A year later, Mikhail Vasilyevich’s wife committed suicide. Frunze's body was buried on Red Square, Sofia Alekseevna's grave is located at the Novodevichy cemetery in Moscow.
Memory
The unofficial version of Frunze’s death was taken as the basis for Pilnyak’s work “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” and the memoirs of the emigrant Bazhanov “Memoirs of Stalin’s Former Secretary.” The general’s biography was of interest not only to writers, but also to Soviet and Russian filmmakers. The image of the brave military leader of the Red Army was used in 24 films, in 11 of which Frunze was played by actor Roman Zakharyevich Khomyatov.
Streets, settlements, geographical objects, motor ships are named after the commander. destroyers and cruisers. Monuments to Mikhail Frunze were installed in more than 20 cities of the former Soviet Union, including Moscow, Bishkek, Almaty, St. Petersburg, Ivanovo, Tashkent, Kyiv. Photos of the Red Army general are in all modern history textbooks.
Awards
- 1919 – Order of the Red Banner
- 1920 – Honorary revolutionary weapon
Frunze Mikhail Vasilyevich (party pseudonym - Arseny, Trifonych; born January 21 (February 2), 1885 - death October 31, 1925) - party, state and military figure, military theorist. Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR and People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs. From 1904 to 1915 he was repeatedly arrested and exiled, twice sentenced to death penalty, later replaced by lifelong exile for revolutionary activities.
During the Civil War he was commander of the army and a number of fronts. Since 1920 - commanded the troops of Ukraine and Crimea. Since 1924, he was Deputy Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs; at the same time he was the chief of staff of the Workers' and Peasants' Red Army and the Military Academy. Candidate member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks).
Origin. Early years
Mikhail Frunze, from the bourgeoisie, was born in the city of Pishpek (Kyrgyzstan) into the family of a military paramedic (father - Moldavian, mother - Russian). At the age of 12, the boy lost his father. His mother, left with five children, put all her efforts into their education. Mikhail graduated from high school with a gold medal. Entered the St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute. Since 1904 - member of the RSDLP.
Military and political activities
1916 - sent by the Bolsheviks to Western Front, where he worked under the name Mikhailov in the institutions of the Zemstvo Union, and headed the Bolshevik underground in Minsk. After the February Revolution, he was elected head of the people's militia of Minsk. 1917, August - appointed chief of staff of the revolutionary troops of the Minsk region and led the fight against the army on the Western Front.
In October, with a 2,000-strong detachment of Shuya workers and soldiers, he took part in the October armed coup in Moscow. 1918, August - appointed military commissar of the Yaroslavl military district. He did a lot of work to form Red Army units and train them. He was the organizer of the suppression of a number of revolts.
1919, February - Commander of the 4th Army, 1919, in May - June - Commander of the Turkestan Army, and from March 1919, simultaneously commander of the Southern Army Group Eastern Front. During the counter-offensive of the Eastern Front, he carried out a number of successful offensive operations against the main forces, for which he received the Order of the Red Banner. 1919, July - commander of the troops of the Eastern Front that liberated the Northern and Middle Urals. 1919, August 15 - commands the Turkestan Front, whose troops completed the defeat of the southern group of Kolchak’s army, took the Southern Urals and opened the way to Turkestan.
1920, September 21 - appointed commander of the newly created Southern Front and leads the operation to defeat troops in Northern Tavria and Crimea, for which he is awarded the Honorary Revolutionary Weapon.
From December 1920 to March 1924, Mikhail Frunze was the authorized representative of the RVSR in Ukraine, commander of the troops of Ukraine and Crimea, at the same time a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine and deputy chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR (since February 1922). For the defeat of the army of Wrangel and Petliura and the elimination of banditry in Ukraine, he was awarded the second Order of the Red Banner.
1924, March - Deputy Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR and People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, and from April 1924 - simultaneously Chief of Staff of the Red Army and Head of the Military Academy of the Red Army (later named after M.V. Frunze). 1925, January - Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR and People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs.
Personal life
Mikhail Frunze's wife's name was Sofya Alekseevna Popova (12/12/1890 - 09/04/1926, daughter of a Narodnaya Volya member). The marriage produced two children - daughter Tatyana and son Timur. After the death of their father in 1925 and mother in 1926, the children lived with their grandmother Mavra Efimovna Frunze (1861 - 1933). In 1931, after the grandmother’s serious illness, the children were adopted by a friend of their father, Voroshilov, who received permission to adopt a special by resolution of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks.
The mystery of Frunze's death
Frunze loved driving fast: at times he himself got behind the wheel or told the driver to drive. In 1925, he had two accidents, and rumors began to spread that it was no coincidence. The last of them happened in September: Mikhail Vasilyevich flew out of the car and hit a lamppost hard.
After the accident, the People's Commissar for Military Affairs once again suffered from a stomach ulcer - he fell ill while he was in the Vladimir Central Prison. Mikhail Frunze could not stand the subsequent operation. According to the official version, the cause of death is a combination of difficult to diagnose diseases that led to cardiac paralysis.
Few believed that this death was accidental. Some were sure that Frunze had a hand in the death - only a few months had passed since the former replaced the latter as People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs of the Soviet Union. Others explicitly hinted at Stalin's involvement.
A year later, the writer Boris Pilnyak puts forward a version that J.V. Stalin got rid of a potential competitor in this manner. By the way, shortly before Frunze’s death, an article was published in the English “Airplane” where he was called the “Russian Napoleon”.
The party leadership found out about the article. According to the testimony of B.G. Bazhanov (Former secretary of Stalin), the leader of the people saw in Frunze the future Bonaparte and expressed sharp dissatisfaction about this. Then he suddenly showed touching concern for Mikhail Vasilyevich, saying: “We absolutely do not monitor the precious health of our best workers,” after which the Politburo a little or forcefully forced the commander to agree to the operation.
Bazhanov (and he was not alone) believed that Stalin killed Mikhail Frunze in order to put his own man, Voroshilov, in his place. They claim that during the operation, exactly the kind of anesthesia that Frunze could not endure due to the characteristics of his body was used.
Meanwhile, Frunze’s wife could not bear the death of her husband: in despair, the woman committed suicide. He took their children, Tanya and Timur, into his care.
Heritage
He carried out military reforms (reducing the size of the Red Army and building it on the basis of a mixed personnel-territorial principle). Author of military theoretical works.
In Soviet times, the capital of Kyrgyzstan bore the name Frunze ( former city Pishpek, where Mikhail was born), one of the mountain peaks of the Pamirs, Navy ships, a military academy. Many streets and settlements in cities and villages of the former Soviet Union were named after him.
On October 31, 1925, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, Mikhail Frunze, died after an operation. No one still knows under what circumstances his death occurred. We will consider 5 versions of the death of the great statesman and military leader.
Official version
For almost 10 years, Frunze suffered from abdominal pain. Doctors diagnosed intestinal bleeding three times, the last time in September 1925 after a car accident. Experienced doctors knew that for stomach ulcers it was necessary to use conservative treatment, and then, if there was no result, to decide on surgical intervention. Bed rest and treatment improved Frunze's well-being. But attacks of pain sometimes confined him to bed, and entire medical consultations were held on this issue - there were three in October 1925 alone. On October 27, the third council decided to transfer Frunze from the Kremlin hospital to Botkinskaya, where on October 29, Dr. Vladimir Rozanov began the operation. He was assisted by doctors Grekov and Martynov, and anesthesia was administered by Alexey Ochkin. On October 31, 1925, after an operation, 40-year-old Mikhail Frunze died. According to the official conclusion, he died from general blood poisoning.
Anesthesia
Drug addict Alexei Ochkin had 14 years of work experience (since 1911, when he graduated from Moscow University). Of course, he knew what general anesthesia was and knew how to administer it. However, according to official data, Frunze tolerated the anesthesia very poorly and had difficulty falling asleep - they could begin the operation only after 30 minutes. For general anesthesia, Ochkin used ether, and then switched to chloroform anesthesia, which is quite toxic; the difference between a soporific and a killing dose is very small. The combined use of ether and chloroform increases the negative effect. Ochkin could not have known this, since since 1905 many works concerning the use of chloroform have been published. However, some scientists admit that Frunze’s heart stopped because Ochkin carelessly administered anesthesia.
Stalin is a killer
At Frunze’s funeral, Stalin made the following speech: “Maybe this is exactly what is needed, for old comrades to go to the grave so easily and so simply. Unfortunately, our young comrades are not so easy and far from being able to rise up to replace the old ones.” Some noticed a secret, hidden meaning in these words, and with enviable regularity information began to appear that the true cause of Frunze’s death was Joseph Stalin.
Lenin died in 1924. Frunze is among those who could decide critical issues. His authority is indisputable. Naturally, Stalin could not like this, especially since Frunze never bowed his head obligingly to anyone. His death would have changed the balance of power in the party and would have strengthened the influence of Stalin, who would have been able to take control of the leadership of the Red Army by placing his own man there. Later this happened.
Writer Boris Pilnyak was also convinced that Frunze was killed on Stalin’s personal order. In 1926, he wrote “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon,” in which he expresses his version. From the book one could understand that forty-year-old Frunze was stabbed to death by surgeons during a cardiac operation - on orders from above. It was on sale for two days and was immediately withdrawn.
Voroshilov and Budyonny
Frunze had no obvious enemies among the leadership of the USSR, unless you take into account his difficult relationship with party leader Kliment Voroshilov and Soviet military leader Semyon Budyonny, who could easily persuade Stalin.
Frunze, being a talented people's commissar, did not fit into the ranks of the country's jealous and uneducated rulers. Here it is also necessary to take into account the fact that the composition of the council was determined by the medical commission of the Central Committee of the RCP (b). Doctor Vladimir Rozanov initially did not want to perform the operation and only after being summoned to the Politburo, where he was called to account, did he radically change his position.
Shot while hunting
It is known that in 1925, after an unfinished vacation in the Caucasus, Stalin came to Crimea, where Kliment Voroshilov and Matvey Shkiryatov (party leaders) were already there, and summoned Frunze there. The excuse is to improve your health. During the rest, a hunt took place, which, according to the testimonies of the participants, ended unsuccessfully. Some theorists suggest that during this very hunt in Frunze one of his comrades fired - whether by accident or not is unknown. If the injury actually occurred while hunting, then it is clear why a team of doctors from Moscow was urgently called to Crimea, including “bullet specialist” Vladimir Rozanov (on April 23, 1922, in the Soldatenkovskaya hospital, he removed a bullet that had remained in Lenin’s body since since the assassination attempt on him by Fanny Kaplan in 1918). When comparing all the data, it turns out that Frunze was wounded in the abdominal cavity, treated for several weeks, but could not be saved and, in order not to make a fuss, they published a completely different cause of death.
October 31, 1925 from the consequences surgery Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council and People's Commissar of the USSR for Military and Naval Affairs Mikhail Vasilyevich Frunze died. Since then and to this day, statements have not ceased that Frunze was deliberately killed under the guise of an operation.
From worker to commander in chief
Mikhail Frunze was born in 1885 in the family of a paramedic (Moldavian by nationality) on the distant colonial outskirts Russian Empire- in Bishkek (this city, the capital of Soviet Kyrgyzstan, was later named after him for a long time). Unlike most Red military leaders who had experience in the army before the revolution, Frunze was promoted to military posts directly from the revolutionary struggle. Nevertheless, he showed that even a civilian without military education can be a first-class strategist and organizer. Of course, Frunze used the advice and help of military experts, of whom the closest to him was the former tsarist general Fyodor Novitsky.
Having immediately become the commander of the army, without intermediate steps, Frunze in the spring of 1919 stopped the advance of Kolchak’s armies on Samara. Subsequently, Frunze, as commander of the army group and the front, did not know defeat. After the Civil War, Frunze wrote and published several military theoretical works. He also showed himself in the diplomatic field, going to Ankara at the end of 1921 to see Mustafa Kemal Pasha with the aim of concluding a military alliance between the Soviet and Turkish republics.
In the internal party struggle
Frunze's latest rise was preceded by participation in the struggle for power between two groups within the top of the CPSU (b). With Lenin's incapacity, which began in 1922, Trotsky, who was revered by everyone as the organizer and leader of the Red Army, seemed to automatically become his successor. It was this circumstance that aroused fear and hatred towards him on the part of his comrades. They were afraid that Trotsky would use his position and his popularity to seize all power. In 1923, the triumvirate of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin began to fight Trotsky. Frunze became their battering ram
At the end of October 1923, at the plenum of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), Frunze made a report that criticized Trotsky’s activities at the head of the Red Army. It is noteworthy that this plenum took place against the background of reports (as it turned out, greatly exaggerated) about the beginning of a revolution in Germany. The decision about this revolution was made by the executive committee of the Comintern under the leadership of Zinoviev in September 1923. At the decisive moment, Trotsky, who always advocated a speedy world revolution, was unable or unwilling to move the Red Army to the aid of the German workers. This weakened Trotsky's position in the internal party struggle.
The Central Committee at that moment left Trotsky in the posts he held, but in March 1924 made Frunze, as it were, the “chief overseer” of him, appointing him Trotsky’s deputy in the positions of chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council and People’s Commissar of Military Affairs. Frunze himself, according to general evidence, did not have great power ambitions. His performance on the side of the “first triumvirate” in the Bolshevik leadership was dictated, in many ways, by his good personal attitude towards Kliment Voroshilov.
Voroshilov, like Frunze, also came to military leadership posts directly from the ranks of the revolutionary workers. The conflict between Voroshilov and Trotsky occurred at the end of 1918, during the defense of Tsaritsyn, and was caused by Trotsky’s excessive, in the opinion of Voroshilov (as well as Stalin), preference for the use of tsarist military experts. Frunze was close to this position. Perhaps this prompted him to criticize Trotsky at the plenum. The fact that Frunze in this case acted more in the interests of others than in his own can probably be evidenced by Trotsky’s remark that Frunze “had little understanding of people.”
Be that as it may, having become Trotsky’s successor in both important posts in January 1925 and virtually single-handedly leading the Red Army, Frunze largely continued his line of building the Red Army.
Not necessary surgery
Since 1922, Frunze often had attacks of abdominal pain, and since 1924, intestinal bleeding began. Doctors diagnosed him with a duodenal ulcer. In keeping with the tradition of intrusive concern for the health of his comrades, which Lenin introduced into the party, the leadership persistently encouraged Frunze to go under the surgeon’s knife, although not all doctors recognized the need for the operation. The last, specially selected council decided to kill the People's Commissar.
At the same time, the People's Commissar himself felt good, which he wrote about in his last letter to his wife on October 26, 1925. But he completely trusted the doctors’ conclusions and wanted him to be operated on as quickly as possible and to eliminate the source of constant anxiety. On October 29, the operation took place in the current Botkin Hospital. Two days later, Frunze’s heart stopped. Official conclusion: general blood poisoning during the operation.
Even the government version pointed to the incompetence and carelessness of surgeons when performing a basic operation. But it’s suspicious that it didn’t correspond much to reality either. There is evidence that the surgeons, having easily operated on the ulcer (it turned out to be harmless), for some reason began to rummage through Frunze’s entire abdominal cavity, looking for other possible sources of his ailments. According to the doctor and historian Viktor Topolyansky, the cause of death was intoxication from an overdose of painkillers. When ether general anesthesia did not work, doctors added chloroform to Frunze through a mask. It is possible that both of these reasons were combined.
Who could benefit?
The incompetence of the doctors who operated on Frunze, according to any version, looks so monstrous that doubt inevitably creeps in that the cause of death was an unintentional mistake. And ever since then, there have been two main versions of the murder of Frunze on the operating table.
The first, which arose immediately, connected the mysterious death of Frunze with his speech against Trotsky and his subsequent replacement in leadership positions. Immediately in response, a version appeared accusing Stalin of the murder of Frunze. It gained a long life thanks to Boris Pilnyak’s book “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” (1927) and later campaigns to expose Stalin’s crimes.
However, if Trotsky had a motive to take revenge on Frunze, then Stalin’s motives do not look convincing. The modified version, which, of course, has no evidence, looks like this. Replacing Trotsky with Frunze did not provide Stalin with control over the Red Army; he wanted to appoint his longtime friend Voroshilov to these posts, which he managed to do after Frunze’s death.
Whether Frunze’s death was organized on someone’s orders, and by whom exactly, we are unlikely to ever find out.
Let Comrade Frunze not be called by us the leader of our party, the leader of our revolution, let his name not flaunt next to the name of Lenin and our other leaders - but comrades, who was close to him, who came across him, must say that he was the greatest worker, he was the best leader of our Red Army. In terms of military knowledge, in terms of organizing military forces, Comrade Frunze had no equal among our party members.Ordzhonikidze G.K Articles and speeches. - M., 1956.T. 1. - pp. 410–411
The milestones set by M. V. Frunze on the path of development of the armed forces of our state will continue to serve us as an indication in which direction to go towards achieving the goals that are dear to us, for which he served, for which he gave everything that was the best in his life , and the very life of M.V. Frunze.Voroshilov K. E. Articles and speeches. - M., 1936. -S. 84–86
It is reliably known that Mikhail Vasilyevich Frunze died on October 31, 1925 at 5:40 a.m. in the former Soldatenkovsky Hospital (now Botkin Hospital), located in Moscow. On November 3, he was buried with great honors on Red Square near the Mausoleum of V.I. Lenin. By that time, few had received such an honor.
In Soviet times, regarding the death of M. V. Frunze, they adhered to one official version: after surgery on the stomach, Mikhail Vasilyevich died of cardiac paralysis. For more than 60 years, no one doubted this version.
In the 90s of the 20th century, in connection with the beginning of “perestroika” and “glasnost”, soviet history began to come under severe criticism. Any historical facts. At the same time, researchers did this both by relying on new documents and by developing all sorts of bold versions of their own. In the 90s, especially after the abolition of censorship, everyone began to write about everything. Out of habit, many people believed what was published. So legends and versions were elevated to the rank of facts. This also happened in relation to the death of M.V. Frunze.
Today there are several versions. There is no direct evidence for any of them. I consider it my duty to offer some to the reader.
In March 1989, the Military Historical magazine published an article by Roy Medvedev “On the death of M. V. Frunze and F. E. Dzerzhinsky.” This year was one of the last in the history of Soviet power. Author - doctor historical sciences, already in the 60s was in opposition to the communists. Therefore, of course, I tried to depict everything exclusively in black.
In his article, he writes, in particular, that the death of 40-year-old M.V. Frunze gave rise to many rumors. Any experienced doctor, even in 1925, knew well that for a stomach ulcer, conservative treatment should first be carried out and only if it fails, surgical intervention should be resorted to. M. V. Frunze did not want to undergo surgery, preferring conservative treatment, especially since by the autumn of 1925 he felt very well - peptic ulcer almost didn't make itself known.
The question arises: why, despite such obvious success of conservative treatment, did both councils decide to undergo surgery? This decision, incredible for experienced doctors, can only be explained by external pressure. But such pressure existed. It is known that the issue of M.V. Frunze’s illness was discussed even at the Politburo, and it was Stalin and Voroshilov who insisted on the operation.
In his letter to his wife, M.V. Frunze somewhat bent his heart, since he was not satisfied with the decision of the two consultations. The bravest commander found himself in a rather difficult position. To refuse the operation meant to incur the reproaches of fear and indecision, and he reluctantly agreed.
This is to a certain extent confirmed and concretized by the memoirs of the old Bolshevik and personal friend of Mikhail Vasilyevich I.K. Hamburg, published in 1965.
“Shortly before the operation,” writes Hamburg, “I went to see him. He was upset and said that he did not want to go on the operating table... A premonition of some kind of trouble, something irreparable, depressed him...
I convinced Mikhail Vasilyevich to refuse the operation, since the thought of it depresses him. But he shook his head negatively:
Stalin insists on the operation; says that we need to get rid of stomach ulcers once and for all. I decided to go under the knife.”
The operation took place on the afternoon of October 29. Chloroform was used as anesthesia, although more was already known then. effective remedy- ether. According to Hamburg, Frunze had trouble falling asleep and the anesthesia had a weak effect on him. Professor Rozanov, who led the operation, decided to almost double the normal dose of chloroform, which was extremely dangerous for the heart. The question inevitably arises: why was such a risk necessary?
The operation began at 12:40 p.m., and it was immediately revealed that it was completely unnecessary. The surgeons did not find an ulcer, only a small scar on duodenum testified that she once existed. However, the increased dose of anesthesia turned out to be too much for the heart of M.V. Frunze - the condition of the person being operated on sharply worsened. At 5 pm, that is, after the operation, Stalin and Mikoyan arrived at the hospital, but they were not allowed into the patient’s room. Stalin gave Frunze a note: “Friend! Today at 5 pm I was with Comrade Rozanov (me and Mikoyan). They wanted to come to you, but they didn’t let you in, it was an ulcer. We were forced to submit to force. DON'T BE MISSED, MY DEAR. Hello. We will come again, we will come again... Koba.” But neither Stalin nor Mikoyan had to see Mikhail Vasilyevich alive. 30 hours after the operation, M. V. Frunze’s heart stopped beating.
On November 1, 1925, a government message was published in Pravda: “On the night of October 31, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, Mikhail Vasilyevich FRUNZE, died of heart paralysis after an operation.” On the same day, the “Anatomical Diagnosis” was published in the newspapers, which, in particular, said: “Healed round ulcer of the duodenum with a pronounced cicatricial compaction... Superficial ulcerations of varying duration of the exit of the stomach and the upper part of the duodenum... Acute purulent inflammation of the peritoneum. Parenchymal degeneration of the muscles of the heart, kidneys, liver..."
It is quite obvious that M.V. Frunze did not have acute purulent inflammation of the peritoneum before the operation, since, according to the testimony of himself and his friends, he felt quite healthy and able to work. Acute peritonitis, undoubtedly the main cause of death, was one of the consequences of the operation, during which an infection was introduced into the abdominal cavity of the person being operated on. Postoperative peritonitis usually develops very quickly - within 24 hours, and in 1925 they did not yet know how to fight them. As for the degeneration of the heart muscle, kidneys, and liver, all this was the result of an increased dose of chloroform introduced into the body. Any medicinal reference book indicates that chloroform is a highly toxic substance that causes cardiac arrhythmia, dystrophic changes in the myocardium, fatty degeneration, cirrhosis and liver atrophy. It also disrupts metabolism, in particular carbohydrate metabolism.
Pravda also contained a rather vague “conclusion” about the disease. “The disease of M. V. Frunze,” it said, “as an autopsy showed, consisted, on the one hand, in the presence of a round ulcer of the duodenum, which underwent scarring and resulted in the development of scar growths... On the other hand, as consequences from the operation that took place in 1916 - removal of the appendix, there was an old inflammatory process in the abdominal cavity. The operation undertaken on October 29, 1925 for a duodenal ulcer caused an exacerbation of the existing chronic inflammatory process, which resulted in a rapid decline in cardiac activity and death. The underdevelopment of the aorta and arteries discovered at autopsy, as well as the preserved thymus gland, are the basis for the assumption that the body is unstable in relation to anesthesia and in the sense of its poor resistance to infection.”
On November 3, 1925, Pravda published several articles dedicated to the memory of M. V. Frunze. (“Can we blame the poor heart,” wrote, for example, Mikhail Koltsov, “for surrendering to 60 grams of chloroform, after it had withstood two years of death row, the hangman’s rope around its neck.”) The official article “ To the medical history of comrade. Frunze”, which reported: “In view of the interest that the question of the medical history of Comrade represents for comrades. Frunze... the editors consider it timely to publish the following document.” Next came the protocols of two consultations at the bedside of M. V. Frunze and the conclusion about the operation. It said, in particular: “On October 29... Comrade M.V. Frunze underwent an operation at the Botkin Hospital by Professor V.N. Rozanov, with the participation of Professor I. Grekov, Professor A. Martynov and Doctor A.D. Ochkin... Operation performed under general anesthesia, lasted 35 minutes. Upon opening the abdominal cavity... they discovered... a diffuse thickening of the pylorus and a small scar at the beginning of the duodenum, apparently at the site of a healed ulcer... The patient had difficulty falling asleep and remained under anesthesia for one hour and 5 minutes.”
It would be useful to cite here another document - a recording of a conversation full of all kinds of contradictory and vague reasoning with Professor G. Grekov, published in Izvestia on November 3.
“The last consultation was on October 23,” Grekov said. - All the details of this meeting were outlined by Comrade. Frunze, and he was offered surgery. Despite the fact that the possibility of an unfavorable outcome from Comrade. Frunze did not hide; he nevertheless wished to undergo the operation, since he considered his condition to deprive him of the opportunity to continue responsible work. Comrade Frunze only asked to operate on him as soon as possible. After the operation, poor heart activity raised alarm bells...
Naturally, no one was allowed to see the patient, but when Comrade. Frunze was informed that Comrade had sent him a note. Stalin, he asked to read this note and smiled joyfully... The operation was not serious. It was performed according to all the rules of surgical art, and its sad outcome would seem completely inexplicable if one did not weigh the data obtained during the operation and autopsy. It is clear that in the body of the deceased... there were features that determined the sad outcome.” It was further said that the revolution and war weakened Frunze’s body. “The question involuntarily arises,” Grekov concluded his conversation, “whether it was possible to do without surgery. All the changes that were discovered during the operation speak undoubtedly in favor of the fact that Comrade. Frunze was incurable without surgery and was even under the threat of imminent and possibly sudden death.”
The circumstances surrounding the unexpected death of M. V. Frunze, as well as the extremely confusing explanations of the doctors, caused bewilderment in wide party circles. Ivanovo-Voznesensk communists even demanded the creation of a special commission to investigate the causes of death. In mid-November 1925, under the chairmanship of N.I. Podvoisky, a meeting of the board of the Society of Old Bolsheviks was held on this issue. People's Commissar of Health N.A. Semashko was summoned to report to him. From his report and answers to questions it emerged that Frunze’s death required additional investigation.
A Central Committee commission was appointed. At the head of this commission were people whom Semashko spoke of with great disapproval. It also turned out that before the council, V.N. Rozanov was summoned by Stalin and Zinoviev, and that already during the operation, from too large a dose of anesthesia for the patient, there was a threat of death on the operating table. We had to take emergency measures.
After the death of M.V. Frunze, Professor Rozanov became so ill that the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR A. Rykov went to him to reassure him and inform him that no one held him responsible for the unfavorable outcome of the operation, the board of the Society of Old Bolsheviks after discussing the causes of M.'s death. V. Frunze decided on an ugly attitude towards the old Bolsheviks. It was agreed that this decision should be brought to the attention of the party congress.
At the XIV Congress of the CPSU(b) in December 1925, the issue of the death of M.V. Frunze was not discussed. However, in the fifth issue of the magazine “New World” for 1926, “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” by B. Pilnyak was published. True, in the preface to it, the author wrote: “The plot of this story suggests that the reason for writing it and the material was the death of M. V. Frunze. Personally, I almost didn’t know Frunze, I barely knew him, having seen him twice... I find it necessary to tell the reader all this so that the reader does not look for genuine facts and living persons in him.” However, in reality it was a story about the death of M. V. Frunze, and B. Pilnyak revealed a very good knowledge of all the circumstances associated with the operation and the death of a major military leader named “Gavrilov”, which was read by many as “Frunze”. Here are a few excerpts from this work:
“…. Before leaving home, the professor, with a solemn face and with some respectful fear, called the telephone: by all sorts of roundabout telephone routes, the professor penetrated into that telephone network, which had only some thirty or forty wires; he called the office of house number one, respectfully he asked if there would be any new orders, a firm voice on the telephone suggested that he come immediately after the operation with a report. The professor said: “All the best, it will be done,” bowed before the receiver and did not immediately hang up.”
A little further down, describing the operation, Pilnyak reveals another important secret:
“.. on the shiny meat of the stomach, in the place where the ulcer should have been - white, as if sculpted from wax, similar to the larva of a dung beetle - there was a scar, - indicating that the ulcer had already healed, - indicating that the operation was pointless ...
...The patient had no pulse, no heart beat, no breathing, and his legs were cold. It was a cardiac shock: the body, which did not take chloroform, was poisoned by chloroform. It was that a person would never come back to life, that a person had to die... It was clear that Gavrilov had to die under the knife, on the operating table.”
After the operation was completed, the professor “delved into that telephone network, which had thirty to forty wires, bowed to the receiver and said that the operation went well.”
After that, “... in a covered Royce (Rolls-Royce), Professor Lozovsky urgently drove to house number one; "Royce" silently entered the gate with the vultures, past the sentries, stood at the entrance, the sentry opened the door; Lozovsky entered the office, where on a red cloth desk there were three telephones..."
The author’s fantasies were very similar to reality, many understood this. Therefore, it is not surprising that the entire circulation of the magazine with Pilnyak’s story was confiscated. By chance, only a few issues have survived, representing today an enormous bibliographic rarity.
The authorities acted very decisively and quickly. Already in the next issue of Novy Mir, the editors admitted that the publication of Pilnyak’s story was “an obvious and gross mistake.”
I don’t know whether the story was published in emigrant or Western press at the end of the 20s, but in 1965 the Flegon Press publishing house in London published it in Russian under the title “The Death of the Army Commander.”
The son of the famous revolutionary and Soviet statesman and military leader Antonov-Ovseenko, historian A.V. Antonov-Ovseenko has no doubt that Frunze’s death as a result of the operation was a “political action of elimination” that was organized by Stalin.
But there were other opinions. The American historian and Sovietologist A. Ulam, in his book about Stalin, strongly objects to this version. He believes that the whole point was the extremely poor state of medical care in the USSR in 1925. A. Ulam recalls that even under Lenin, the practice of interference by party authorities in medical matters was introduced and many party leaders were forcibly prescribed rest or treatment. So the decision of the Politburo on the operation that Frunze should undergo was not something unusual. A. Ulam considers Pilnyak’s story to be an undoubted slander, which “Pilnyak undertook under the influence of someone who wanted to hit Stalin... It is noteworthy,” Ulam wrote, “that there were no consequences for Pilnyak and the editor at that time. Either out of contempt for lies, or out of calculated restraint, or perhaps both, Stalin chose not to respond to slander, which even in a democratic society would provide sufficient grounds for criminal prosecution of its author and publisher.”
A. Ulam, of course, is wrong when he writes about Stalin’s “contempt” for lies. Medical care in the USSR in 1925 was indeed very poorly organized, but not for the country's highest leaders. When it came to their health, the best doctors were involved, including doctors and consultants from Germany. The Politburo took care of the health of members of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, prescribing doctors, medicines or sending Soviet leaders to the best clinics in Switzerland, Germany, and resorts Western countries. But the Politburo never insisted on this or that method of treatment, much less on operations, so in this regard the case of M.V. Frunze was just an exception, and, moreover, very strange in its insistence. To take any punitive measures against Pilnyak or the editor of the magazine would only mean for Stalin to draw excessive attention to this matter. There could be no question of a democratic court regarding “slander”; such a court could have highlighted such details of M. V. Frunze’s treatment that they wanted to quickly forget about.
I.V. Stalin dealt with B.A. Pilnyak himself later. As soon as the “great terror” of 1937–1938 began, Boris Andreevich was one of the first to be arrested. It is unknown whether he died in custody or was shot.
Speaking on November 3, 1925 at the funeral of M.V. Frunze, Stalin said: “Maybe this is exactly what is needed, for old comrades to sink into the grave so easily and so simply.” Of course, this was not necessary either for the people or for the party. But this turned out to be very important for Stalin, since instead of M.V. Frunze, K.E. Voroshilov was appointed to the post of People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, who, although he had certain services to the party and the revolution, did not possess to any extent neither intellect, nor military talent, nor the authority of Frunze, but he was under the strong influence of Stalin since the time of the battles near Tsaritsyn.
The version of the murder of M. V. Frunze was then developed by many. In particular, Leonid Mikhailovich Mlechin devoted a chapter of his book “The Russian Army between Trotsky and Stalin”, published in 2002, to the issue of the death of Mikhail Vasilyevich. Developing the topic, as one of the evidence, he writes that Frunze was operated on by Vladimir Nikolaevich Rozanov, a Stalinist doctor. In the early 20s, he performed a successful operation on Stalin, cutting out his appendix under difficult conditions. Of course, this argument does not stand up to criticism.
V. N. Rozanov is a senior doctor in the surgical department of the Soldatenkovskaya Hospital, and since 1919 he has been a consultant to the Medical and Sanitary Administration of the Kremlin. He treated many, even assisted during the operation when Lenin's bullet was removed after the assassination attempt by Fanny Kaplan in 1918. But at a time when the revolution forced many members of the intelligentsia to emigrate or retire, any doctor was registered.
As for the state of health of M. V. Frunze, of course, the exiles and prisons he endured in his youth were not in vain. Thus, Konstantin Frunze, the military leader’s elder brother, a doctor by profession, found Mikhail Vasilyevich to have a stomach disease back in 1906. When Mikhail was serving time in the Vladimir Central Prison, he complained of stomach pain.
In 1916 he was operated on for acute appendicitis. On October 11, Frunze wrote from Minsk to his sister Lyudmila: “Tomorrow I’m going to the hospital. I’m doing appendicitis surgery.” After the operation, Frunze went to Moscow and rested. But the operation was not performed very successfully and will make itself felt in the future.
Frunze suffered from stomach pain for many years and was diagnosed with duodenal ulcer. Then he began to have dangerous intestinal bleeding, which put him to bed for a long time.
During the Civil War, he sometimes had to lead military operations without getting out of bed. He did not like to be treated, when he was in pain, he swallowed diluted in water baking soda. In 1922, they wanted to send him to drink medicinal waters in Carlsbad (Karlovy Vary), which helps many ulcer sufferers. He flatly refused.
The severity of Frunze's illness was obvious to those who knew him closely. On April 20, 1923, the famous party worker Sergei Konstantinovich Minin, who worked in Petrograd as secretary of the North-Western Regional Bureau of the Central Committee, turned to Voroshilov, Stalin and Ordzhonikidze, with whom he was on friendly terms:
“Klim. Stalin. Sergo.
I am surprised why you do not pay the necessary attention to Frunze’s illness. True, the Central Committee decided last year that Frunze should undergo treatment and provided funds. But this is not enough. We need to monitor the implementation. His illness is severe (stomach ulcer) and can be fatal. Doctors recommend four months of serious treatment. Next year it will be six months, etc. And then, when Mikhail Vasilyevich is out of action, we will say that this is how he worked, forgetting his serious illness and the like.
As I see, Frunze is not at all going to receive proper treatment: there will be maneuvers and so on.
It is necessary to force them to undergo treatment in a comradely and party way, as it seems that Comrade Lenin did with many.”
In 1925, Mikhail Vasilyevich, in addition to all other troubles, got into car accidents three times. Moreover, at the beginning of September he fell out of the car at full speed and was seriously hurt. He took a vacation and left for Crimea on September 7. Stalin and Voroshilov rested in Mukhalatka. Frunze wanted to go hunting, he assured that everything would pass in the fresh air. But the doctors, fearing for the life of a high-ranking patient, almost forcibly put him to bed.
On September 29, all three left for Moscow. On the way, Mikhail Vasilyevich also caught a cold. In Moscow, Frunze was immediately admitted to the Kremlin hospital.
On October 8, under the leadership of the People's Commissar of Health of the RSFSR Nikolai Aleksandrovich Semashko, a dozen doctors examined Frunze. They came to the conclusion that there is a danger of perforation of the ulcer, so surgery is indicated for the patient. Although some doctors advocated conservative treatment. In particular, Vladimir Nikolaevich Rozanov doubted the need for the operation.
L. M. Mlechin, political observer of the TVC television company, author and presenter of the programs “Special Folder” and “Minority Opinion”, in his version of the death of M. V. Frunze writes that Rozanov was invited by Stalin and Zinoviev, they asked his opinion about Frunze’s condition. Rozanov suggested postponing the operation, but Stalin allegedly asked not to delay: the country and the party needed the chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council. Maybe we shouldn't blame a famous surgeon for his inability to defend his opinion.
“In the twentieth of October 1925,” says the memoirs of Anastas Ivanovich Mikoyan (then he was the secretary of the North Caucasus regional party committee), “I came to Moscow on business and, going to Stalin’s apartment, learned from him that Frunze was about to undergo an operation. Stalin was clearly worried, and this feeling was passed on to me.
Or maybe it is better to avoid this operation? - I asked.
To this, Stalin replied that he, too, was not sure of the need for the operation, but Frunze himself insisted on it, and the most prominent surgeon in the country, Rozanov, who was treating him, considered the operation “not dangerous.”
“So let’s talk with Rozanov,” I suggested to Stalin.
He agreed. Soon Rozanov, whom I had met a year earlier in Mukhalatka, appeared. Stalin asked him:
Is it true that the operation Frunze is undergoing is not dangerous?
“Like any operation,” Rozanov answered, “it, of course, poses a certain amount of danger.” But usually in our country such operations take place without any particular complications, although you probably know that even ordinary cuts sometimes lead to blood poisoning. But these are very rare cases.
All this was said by Rozanov so confidently that I calmed down somewhat. However, Stalin still asked one more question, which seemed tricky to me:
Well, if instead of Frunze it was, for example, your brother, would you perform such an operation on him or would you refrain?
I would abstain, came the answer.
You see, Comrade Stalin,” replied Rozanov, “peptic ulcer disease is such that if the patient follows the prescribed regimen, it is possible to do without surgery. My brother, for example, would strictly adhere to the regime assigned to him, but Mikhail Vasilyevich, as far as I know him, cannot be kept within the framework of such a regime. He will continue to travel around the country a lot, participate in military maneuvers, and certainly will not follow the prescribed diet. Therefore, in this case, I am in favor of the operation...”
Then Anastas Ivanovich Mikoyan was told that Frunze himself, in letters to his wife, objected to the operation, wrote that he generally felt much better and he did not see the need to do anything radical, did not understand why the doctors were talking about the operation.
“This amazed me,” writes Mikoyan, “since Stalin told me that Frunze himself insists on the operation. I was told that Stalin performed a performance with us “in his spirit,” as he put it. He didn’t have to involve Rozanov; it was enough for the GPU to “treat” the anesthesiologist…”
Memoir literature is not the most reliable source when it comes to specific facts, since memories are created many years after the events described. In addition, memoirs are usually corrected and sometimes added to by editors and compilers.
In reality, Frunze not only did not resist the operation, but, on the contrary, asked for it. This is evidenced by letters to his wife, Sofia Alekseevna, who was treated in Yalta for tuberculosis. Frunze sent her to both Finland and Crimea, but nothing helped. Sofia Alekseevna felt bad and did not get up. Doctors recommended that she spend the whole winter in Yalta. She was worried: would there be enough money?
Frunze replied:
“I’ll manage somehow with the money. Provided, of course, that you do not pay for all doctor’s visits from your own funds. There won't be enough income for this. The last time I took money from the Central Committee. I think we will survive the winter. If only you could stand firmly on your feet..."
“I'm still in the hospital. There will be a new consultation on Saturday. I'm completely healthy now. I’m afraid that they will refuse the operation.”
Seventeen specialists took part in the next consultation on October 24. They came to the same conclusion:
“The duration of the disease and the tendency to bleeding, which can be life-threatening, do not give the right to risk further expectant treatment.”
At the same time, doctors warned Frunze that the operation could be difficult and serious and does not guarantee a 100% cure. Nevertheless, Mikhail Vasilyevich, as Professor Grekov later said, “wanted to undergo surgery because he believed that his condition made it impossible for him to continue responsible work.”
Ivan Mikhailovich Gronsky met Frunze in the Kremlin hospital, which was then located in the Amusement Palace:
“The hospital, despite its loud name, was more than small. And, as I learned, there were few sick people in it: only ten to fifteen people.
There was nothing remarkable in the small, clean room on the second floor where I was placed: a simple metal bed, two or three Viennese chairs, a bedside table and a simple table, that’s probably all the furnishings. The only thing that struck me was, perhaps, the thick walls of the Amusement Palace...”
Troysky was warned that he might have to undergo surgery.
Well,” Frunze told him, “if surgery is needed, we’ll go to the Botkin hospital together.”
Why to the Botkin Hospital? - Gronsky asked.
There is no surgical department in the Kremlin hospital, so surgical patients are sent there.
Why are you, Mikhail Vasilyevich, sent there? Need surgery? Anything serious?
Doctors find something wrong with the stomach. Either an ulcer or something else. In a word, surgery is required...
A day later, Gronsky met Frunze again:
“He was standing by the wardrobe located next to the stairs. He was in serious condition. The face took on an unusual dark color. Mikhail Vasilyevich received clothes. Having said hello, I asked: was he going to the Botkin hospital?
You guessed it right. I'm going there. Let me know when you arrive. Let's continue our conversations.
M.V. Frunze was, as always, calm. He spoke evenly. Only there was no usual friendly smile on his face. It was concentrated and serious. We shook hands firmly. I went to the consultation and had no idea that I would never see this charming man again...
I learned about Frunze’s death from Professor Rozanov, who was supposed to operate on me too. Luckily, I didn’t need surgery.”
On the eve of the operation, Frunze wrote his last letter to his wife Sofia Alekseevna in Yalta:
“...You should try to take treatment seriously. To do this, you must first pull yourself together. Otherwise, everything is somehow going worse and worse for us. Your worries about your children make things worse for you, and ultimately for them. I once heard the following phrase about us: “The Frunze family is kind of tragic... Everyone is sick, and all the misfortunes are falling on everyone!..” Indeed, we imagine some kind of continuous, solid hospital. We must try to change all this decisively. I took up this matter. You need to do it too..."
This letter explains why Frunze himself wanted the operation. He was tired of being listed among the sick. He hoped to get rid of his ailments at once. The wife did not receive the suicide letter. A telegram arrived about the death of Mikhail Vasilyevich...
Nevertheless, with all his courage, Frunze, like any person, was afraid of the operation. After his death, these words will seem like a premonition of death. But he acted like any man awaiting major surgery. Who and when happily went under the surgeon’s knife?
To the wife of Mikhail Pavlovich Tomsky, a member of the Politburo and secretary of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions, who came to visit him, he said:
So I shaved and put on a new white shirt. I feel, Maria Ivanovna, that I am going to die, but I don’t want to die.
He asked his old friend Joseph Karlovich Hamburg, with whom he was serving exile in Siberia, if he died under the knife, to bury him in Shuya. Lying in a hospital bed, Frunze allegedly said:
If something happens to me, I ask you to go to the Central Committee and tell me about my desire to be buried in Shuya. I think this will also have political significance. Workers will come to my grave and remember the stormy days of 1905 and the Great October Revolution. This will help them in their great work in the future.
If Mikhail Vasilyevich actually said something like that, it would indicate real megalomania. But since Frunze was not seen in anything like that, it remains to be assumed that his old friend, appointed in 1925 as assistant chief of the Red Army Air Force, embellished the conversation in the spirit of that time...
In the memoirs of Marshal Budyonny there is also a story about visiting Frunze in the hospital.
I just can’t believe that there’s an operation today,” Frunze told Budyonny.
Then why should you have surgery if everything is fine? - The marshal was surprised. - Finish this matter and let's go home. My car is at the entrance.
Semyon Mikhailovich, distinguished by his excellent health, lived to be more than ninety years old, rarely went to doctors and sincerely did not understand what Frunze was doing in the hospital.
Budyonny rushed to the wardrobe and handed Frunze his uniform and boots. Mikhail Vasilyevich seemed to agree. He put on his trousers and had already thrown his tunic over his head, but paused for a moment and took it off.
What am I doing? - he said in bewilderment. “I’m going to leave without even asking the doctors’ permission.”
Budyonny did not back down:
Mikhail Vasilyevich, get dressed, and I’ll immediately make an agreement with the doctors.
But Frunze refused this service. He resolutely undressed and went back to bed.
There is a decision of the Central Committee, and I am obliged to implement it...
Military journalists wrote memoirs to Budyonny,
specially assigned to the marshal by the Main Political Directorate of the Soviet Army and Navy, so this story must be treated with caution.
The operation began on October 29 in the afternoon. Rozanov operated, assisted by famous surgeons Ivan Ivanovich Grekov and Alexey Vasilyevich Martynov, anesthesia was given by Alexey Dmitrievich Ochkin. The progress of the operation was observed by employees of the Kremlin Medical and Sanitary Department.
Frunze had difficulty falling asleep, so the operation began half an hour late, writes Viktor Topolyansky. The entire operation lasted thirty-five minutes, and he was given anesthesia for more than an hour. Apparently, they first gave him ether, but since Frunze did not fall asleep, they resorted to chloroform - this is a very strong and dangerous drug. An overdose of chloroform is deadly. During the operation, sixty grams of chloroform and one hundred and forty grams of ether were used. This is significantly more than could be used.
Speaking before the board of the society of old Bolsheviks (chaired by Nikolai Ilyich Podvoisky), People's Commissar of Health Semashko directly said that the cause of Frunze's death was the incorrect administration of anesthesia, and added that if he had been present at the operation, he would have stopped the anesthesia...
During the operation, Frunze’s pulse began to drop, and he was given drugs that stimulate cardiac activity. In those years, such a remedy was adrenaline, because it was not yet known that the combination of chloroform and adrenaline leads to heart rhythm disturbances.
And immediately after the operation, my heart began to fail. Attempts to restore cardiac activity were unsuccessful. Thirty-nine hours later, at five thirty in the morning on October 31, Frunze died of heart failure.
Literally ten minutes later, Stalin, head of government Alexei Ivanovich Rykov, deputy chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council Joseph Stanislavovich Unshlikht, head of the Political Administration of the Red Army Alexey Sergeevich Bubnov, secretary of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee Avel Sofronovich Enukidze and secretary of the North Caucasus Regional Committee of the Party Mikoyan arrived at the hospital.
The government message stated that “on the night of October 31, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, Mikhail Vasilyevich Frunze, died of heart paralysis after an operation.”
The “Bulletin on the death of M. V. Frunze” said:
“After 24 hours on October 30, comrade. Frunze M.V., despite all the measures taken to increase cardiac activity, with continuous consultation of professors I.I. Grekov, A.V. Martynov, D.D. Pletnev, V.N. Rozanov, P.I. Obrosov and doctors A.D. Ochkin and B.O. Poiman, at 5 o’clock. 40 min. On October 31 he died due to symptoms of cardiac paralysis. The blackout began within 40 minutes. until death."
Before the autopsy of the body, the leaders of the Central Committee, the government, and the Revolutionary Military Council again came to the anatomical theater of the Soldatenkovskaya hospital.
Professor Alexey Ivanovich Abrikosov (future academician and Hero of Socialist Labor), who performed the autopsy, drew up a conclusion, also published on November 1, 1925 in Pravda:
“Mikhail Vasilyevich’s disease, as the autopsy showed, consisted, on the one hand, in the presence of a round ulcer of the duodenum, which had undergone scarring and resulted in the development of scar growths around the duodenum, the outlet of the stomach and the gall bladder; on the other hand, as a consequence of the operation that took place in 1916 - removal of the appendix, there was an old inflammatory process in the abdominal cavity.
The operation undertaken on October 29, 1925 for a duodenal ulcer caused an exacerbation of the existing chronic inflammatory process, which led to an acute decline in cardiac activity and death. The underdevelopment of the aorta and arteries discovered at autopsy, as well as the preserved thymus gland, are the basis for the assumption that the body is unstable in relation to anesthesia and in the sense of its poor resistance to infection.
Recent bleeding from the gastrointestinal tract is explained by superficial ulcerations (erosions) found in the stomach and duodenum and are the result of the scar growths mentioned above.”
The autopsy confirmed the diagnosis made to Mikhail Vasilyevich: he really, by all indicators, needed a surgical operation. “A sharp organic narrowing of the outlet of the stomach (stenosis of the turn), repeated intestinal bleeding and the presence of a deep callous ulcer that is not amenable to therapeutic intervention were and remain direct indications for surgical intervention,” writes Victor Topolyansky.
But the autopsy did not give a clear answer to the question: why did Frunze die immediately after the operation?
Vladimir Nikolaevich Rozanov was an experienced and talented surgeon who treated his patients very carefully. His assistants, who were among the best surgeons in the country, are equally highly regarded. So there can be no doubt about the surgical team. But the doctor who gave the anesthesia, according to experts, did not have sufficient experience.
Alexey Dmitrievich Ochkin is a famous doctor; a monument was erected to him in the courtyard of the Botkin Hospital. The Moscow public knew him well also because he married the sister of the founder of the Moscow Art Theater, Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky.
Ochkin’s actions arouse suspicion among Viktor Topolyansky: Ochkin in January 1920 was appointed chief physician of the Budyonny surgical hospital in the First Cavalry Army. “Most likely, Ochkin was involved in the performance of professional duties unusual for him by order of the authorities,” writes Topolyansky. “The corresponding instructions could have been brought to him, in particular, by his former commander Budyonny, who unexpectedly appeared at his clinic the morning before the operation.”
But such stories only happen in adventure novels. Least of all the grunt Budyonny was suitable for the role of liaison in such a delicate matter. Yes, he did not belong to the narrow circle of Stalin’s personal associates. The Secretary General always supported and protected him, but there was little personal communication between them.
The idea of the deliberate murder of M.V. Frunze on the orders of I.V. Stalin is expressed in the publications of the former assistant to the Secretary General Boris Bazhenov, who later fled abroad. But, having escaped the borders of the USSR, this man took an openly anti-Soviet position. One should not have expected any other conclusions from him. In his later arguments, Bazhenov even went so far as to suspect Mikhail Vasilyevich of organizing an anti-government conspiracy on the basis that Frunze, having headed the military department, appointed people to senior command posts “selected on the basis of their military qualifications, but not on the basis of their communist devotion." On this basis, Bazhenov wrote: “Looking at the lists of senior command personnel that Frunze brought, I asked myself the question: “If I were in his place, what personnel would I bring to the military elite?” And I had to answer myself: these were the shots that were quite suitable for coup d'etat in case of war."
Such serious accusations on such shaky ground from the lips of a defector sound very unconvincing.
And again this sounds unconvincing. By 1925, after the defeat of L. D. Trotsky, if desired, J. V. Stalin could relatively easily nominate another person to the post of People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs. But for some reason he chose M.V. Frunze. Perhaps this was a forced step taken under the pressure of specific circumstances (unfavorable foreign policy situation, personnel “hunger”). But information about such circumstances has not been preserved.
The May issue of the New World magazine for 1926 published “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” by the writer Boris Andreevich Pilnyak (Vogau), republished by the Moscow publishing house “Book Chamber” in 1989. In this work, the author, without naming the names of Stalin, Frunze and others, sets out his version of the murder of a major Soviet military leader on the operating table. Contemporaries easily guessed and placed many big names in this story.
The publication of this story caused a big scandal. The press, as if on cue, fell upon its author, who was abroad at that time, accusing him of distorting the true facts and slandering the Soviet system and the Communist Party.
On May 13, 1926, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution in which it recognized “that Pilnyak’s “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” is a malicious, counter-revolutionary and slanderous attack against the Central Committee and the party” and ordered that the fifth issue of the magazine “New World” be withdrawn from circulation. . Members of the journal's editorial board were severely reprimanded, and B. A. Pilnyak himself was excluded from the lists of employees of the country's leading magazines.
This reaction of the party leadership clearly indicates that the writer’s work drew too vivid parallels between fiction and reality. The sudden death of M. V. Frunze caused a lot of noise, and many were ready to see it as a well-planned action.
At the same time, B. A. Pilnyak himself, having returned to the USSR from abroad and learned about the reaction to his work, began to make excuses. In the preface to the book by B. A. Pilnyak, published in 1989, his son B. Andronikashvili-Pilnyak cites a letter in which the disgraced writer writes:
“After writing “Moon,” I gathered a group of writers and my acquaintances from the party (as I usually do) to listen to their criticism - including the editor of Novy Mir. The story was listened to by a relatively large number of people, approved and immediately taken for publication for Novy Mir... Now, in hindsight (I don’t want to justify myself with this letter), I see that the appearance of my story and its publication are the essence tactlessness. But believe me, in the days of writing I did not have a single unworthy thought - and when I, returning from abroad, heard how my story was received by our public - I had nothing but bitter bewilderment , because in no way, not for one minute did I want to write things “insulting the memory of Comrade Frunze” and “maliciously slandering the party” (as was written in the June “New World”).”
This story also evokes double feelings. On the one hand, there is a negative reaction from the leadership of the CPSU(b), behind which it is easy to see I.V. Stalin. The story, of course, worked in favor of the enemies of the Soviet system, of whom there were many in the country and abroad. It is not for nothing that it was subsequently republished several times in various countries with appropriate comments.
On the other hand, when writing it, the author did not have any documents or even competent evidence. It is unlikely that writers and ordinary party members could express anything more significant than personal guesses, and go further than an assessment of the literary style of a work. The topic was too “hot”, and this is what predetermined the publication of the work, and the allegorical character of the characters freed the author and others from responsibility.
Subsequently, B. A. Pilnyak wrote a number of works, some of which were also considered anti-Soviet. He was arrested on October 25, 1937 at his dacha in Peredelkino. On April 21, 1938, B. A. Pilnyak-Vogau was convicted by the Military Collegium Supreme Court USSR and sentenced to death. The sentence was carried out on the same day.
Thus, the story of the death of M.V. Frunze is covered with a web of all kinds of versions, conjectures and conjectures. They have been discussed for many years, especially in recent years, when it became especially fashionable to denounce the Soviet government and personally I.V. Stalin for various crimes. Some authors and screenwriters have already gone so far as to witness the murders of many political, military figures, scientists, writers... Literary permissiveness, the virtual absence of censorship and scientific editing has led to the fact that abundant streams of ordered and amateurish lies poured out on the people, which many accept for the truth. As a result, history is distorted and even changed beyond recognition. The democrats, who blamed many regimes for this, including the Soviet one, easily and quickly adopted anti-scientific methods and began to rewrite history to their own advantage. The life and death of M. V. Frunze became part of this “updated” history.
It is quite obvious that Mikhail Vasilyevich was disliked by many and prevented many from achieving their ambitious plans. The civil war ended victoriously for the communists, the time has come to share power and receive privileges. There was a long line behind them. New positions were invented. But the bureaucratic apparatus could not be dimensionless. Gradually all its cells were filled. Soon any advancement became possible only after the release of the higher level.
At the same time, those who managed to occupy the highest levels of power tried in every possible way to hold on to them. For this reason, they placed their people on the lower steps, mercilessly clearing the way for them.
The armed forces, although weakened, represented a serious power that all politicians and all officials had to reckon with. In their ranks at that time there were too many people who were accustomed to defending their interests with arms in hand. There were also supporters of other parties there. It was necessary to bring this force under strict control and ensure its unconditional devotion to power. This was finally done only in the late 30s.
M.V. Frunze did not completely fit into any of these frameworks. At the same time, due to his authority, he claimed a leading role in the Soviet structure, and received this role. Big problems were to be expected from him in the future. As you know, death decided many of them. And M.V. Frunze died. It remains to build versions about the true cause of this death.