Two Bullets to the Head: How a Wounded General Defeated Napoleon

Table of Contents

• Key Points
• Introduction: A Survival Against All Odds
• Who Was Mikhail Kutuzov?
• The First Bullet (1774): The Battle Near Alushta
• Recovery and the European Medical Tour
• The Second Bullet (1788): The Siege of Ochakov
• Massot: The Unsung French Surgeon
• Long-Term Effects of the Bullet Wounds
• The Road to 1812: Defeating Napoleon
• What This Story Means for Neurosurgery
• Limitations and Historical Uncertainty
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Source Information

Key Points

• Mikhail Kutuzov survived two head gunshot wounds, in 1774 and 1788, before antibiotics, modern imaging, or sterile surgery, and doctors expected him to die both times.
• The French surgeon Massot's note, preserved through Potemkin's correspondence with Catherine II, is described as the most reliable evidence for the second bullet injury.
• The authors suggest Kutuzov's survival likely depended on a smaller-caliber projectile and an oblique bullet path, plus skilled wound care and luck.
• Kutuzov's lasting problems included headaches, dizziness, chronic wound weeping suggesting a cerebrospinal fluid leak, right eye deviation, and progressive vision loss.
• The authors note that survival from penetrating head injury is possible with wound care, infection control, and supportive treatment, and that long-term problems are common.

Introduction: A Survival Against All Odds

Mikhail Illarionovich Golenishchev-Kutuzov (1745 or 1747 – 1813) was shot in the head twice during battles against the Turks — once in 1774 and again in 1788. Both times, doctors expected him to die. Both times, he survived.

His own surgeon, a Frenchman named Massot serving with the Russian army, wrote after treating these seemingly mortal wounds: "It must be believed that fate appoints Kutuzov to something great, because he was still alive after two injuries, a death sentence by all the rules of medical science."

That prediction proved remarkably accurate. Twenty-four years after his second head wound, Kutuzov commanded the Russian forces that repelled Napoleon's invasion of Russia, becoming a national hero and the personification of the Russian spirit. The authors of this study note that Kutuzov's survival likely depended on skilled — and remarkably advanced for the era — neurosurgical care, plus a healthy dose of luck.

Who Was Mikhail Kutuzov?

Kutuzov was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, on September 5, 1745 (though some accounts of his birth date differ, suggesting 1747). His mother died young after giving birth to two other children. His father served in the army of Peter the Great, retiring with the rank of Lieutenant-General, and later played a significant role in designing the canal system of St. Petersburg.

Born the son of a general, Kutuzov seemed destined for military life. He entered military school at age 12 and proved to be a brilliant student. He showed a remarkable gift for languages, becoming fluent in English, French, German, Polish, Swedish, Latin, and Turkish. After graduating with honors from the Noble Artillery School in 1759, he enlisted in the Engineers Corps and taught mathematics at the school.

His early career progressed steadily:

• 1761: Promoted to ensign and assigned to the Astrakhan Infantry Regiment, headed by the renowned Russian commander Alexander Suvorov
• 1762: Became aide-de-camp to Prince Peter August Friedrich, the Governor-General of Reval (now Tallinn), Estonia
• 1764–1765: Assigned command of troops against Polish confederates
• 1770: Joined the Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774), serving on the staff of General Pyotr Rumyantsev's army in Moldova
• 1772: Demoted after being caught mimicking his superiors — sent to fight as a line officer in the Second Crimean Army

Over his lifetime, Kutuzov served five Russian monarchs: Elizabeth, Peter III, Catherine II the Great, Paul I, and Alexander I the Blessed. Each of them, according to historical accounts, placed their utmost trust in him.

The First Bullet (1774): The Battle Near Alushta

On or about July 23 or 24, 1774, Kutuzov was fighting Turkish troops in the Crimean village of Shumy (now called Kutuzovka, or "Kutuzov-village"), near the town of Alushta. While moving his battalion forward and exhorting his troops onward, he was struck by a rifle bullet as he began to descend into a trench.

The reports of exactly where the bullet entered and exited are confusing and contradictory. General Vasiliy Dolgorukov, commander of the Russian Crimean forces, wrote in his battle report: "This field officer received a bullet injury, which hit him between the eye and the temple and went away in the same place on the other side of the face."

Several other historical accounts describe the wound differently:

• F. M. Sinelnikov, Kutuzov's contemporary biographer and military governor of Kiev, recorded: "The bullet ran through the head from one temple to the other behind both eyes. This dangerous passage of the bullet did not injure his eyes, but one eye [the right] became slightly misaligned."
• Louis Alexandre Andrault de Langeron (the Comte de Langeron), then fighting against the Turks with Russian forces, noted: "He was young when he received this wound and he continued to see perfectly through both eyes, just as before."
• The Russian Biographical Dictionary (published 1903) stated Kutuzov was injured by a bullet striking the left temple and flying out near the right eye.
• Another account claimed the ball entered his right temple at a slight angle and tore out near his right eye, with the brain seeming undamaged — but expectations for recovery were "slender."
• One version says Kutuzov, standing on a rock over a trench moat, was struck and knocked into the trench on top of dead soldiers.

The weapon was likely a musket ball. Turkish smooth-bore rifles of the period had an effective range of 50 yards and an extended range of about 200 yards. Rifled firearms with extended range had been patented in England in 1636 and were used in some divisions of the Turkish army (originating from France).

Remarkably, Kutuzov survived — likely thanks to several factors. A ballistics assessment suggests the bullet might have come from a smaller-caliber hunting-type rifle. The authors note that Kutuzov could not have survived a large bullet or musket ball producing a through-and-through cranial injury from a distance of 200 yards or less using the standard army musket of 1774. Additionally, because Turkish troops were positioned uphill and Kutuzov was descending into a trench, the bullet's path was oblique — perhaps entering from the upper left temple and traversing to the lower right temple — which may have reduced its damaging effect.

A November 1775 military report sanctioned by Catherine II, which recommended awards for valor and distinction, describes the battle but does not give details of the injury.

Treatment After the First Wound

Kutuzov was likely operated on in a Russian army campaign hospital near the battlefield. Given the severe head wound with two temporal and/or frontal bone injuries, even if the injury was only one-sided, there was probably severe dural bleeding with skull disruption. Although later accounts credit the French surgeon Massot with treating Kutuzov, Massot is not confirmed to have been in attendance at this battle.

Langeron noted that "The surgeon who treated him kept him in a dark room for six weeks, not once allowing the light of day to penetrate [the gloom]." Kutuzov survived, although his wound was slow to heal.

Lifelong Consequences of the First Injury

The first bullet left Kutuzov with visible and invisible scars:

• His right eye became externally deviated (turned outward), though sight was reportedly unimpaired: after the wound, "he continued to see perfectly through both eyes, just as before."
• He suffered from severe headaches and dizziness
• He had chronic wound weeping (fluid drainage from the wound), which prevented him from enjoying court balls

This description, the authors suggest, points to chronic meningitis — inflammation of the membranes surrounding the brain — possibly secondary to a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak that developed after the gunshot wound. Because of these problems, Kutuzov left the army, and many believed he would never return.

Recovery and the European Medical Tour

Catherine II recognized Kutuzov's value to Russia. She awarded him the Fourth Grade Order of St. George for his gallantry and assigned a considerable sum from the state treasury for his treatment, saying: "We must take care of Kutuzov. He is going to be my great general." After his injury, Catherine II always referred to him as "my general."

Kutuzov visited medical clinics in Berlin and spent many weeks resting and undergoing eye treatment in Leiden, Holland. There, examining physicians were astonished by his medical history and his survival. Sinelnikov noted that Kutuzov's appearance "forced the physicians in foreign countries to write dissertations [on such a clinical history and presentation]." One physician wrote, "If such case had been brought to us by history, we would have considered it a fable, but we saw that a miracle had happened with General Kutuzov."

A famous story illustrates just how extraordinary his survival was considered. While in Holland, Kutuzov learned that one of the professors of medicine — who doubted anyone could survive such a wound — was scheduled to defend his dissertation. The professor stated: "I have heard about Kutuzov, but I believe it is a fable because having such wound, it is very difficult to survive and absolutely impossible to preserve sight." Dramatically, Kutuzov stood up in the audience and replied, "Dear Professor, I am here and can see you."

Kutuzov also traveled to England, where he studied the organization and military history of foreign armies — including tracking George Washington's concurrent campaign against the British. He concluded a strategy that would later serve him well: it was not necessary to win battles; strategic attrition could win wars. This 2-year European tour, the authors note, appears to have been beneficial both for his health and his military education.

Returning to Russia, Kutuzov became a Major General. In 1778, he married Ekaterina Bibikova, daughter of Lieutenant General Bibikov, a prominent member of the Russian nobility. The couple had six children; their only son, Nikolai, died of smallpox at about age 2. The family set up their primary home in Ukraine, spending time in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and remained in great favor with Catherine II.

In 1787, during a field parade in which Kutuzov was riding an aggressive horse, Catherine II requested he come to her and said with a smile: "I am grateful for you, Mr. General! From this time on I have treated you as among my favorite people and among the most excellent generals. I prohibit you from riding wild horses and I will never forgive you if I heard that you did not follow my order. You should take care of yourself."

The Second Bullet (1788): The Siege of Ochakov

Diplomacy ultimately failed to quiet the competing interests in the Black Sea region, and the Russo-Turkish War of 1787–1791 erupted on August 13, 1787. Kutuzov's corps was sent to take the Turkish fortress of Özü (referred to in Russian as Ochakov) on the southern Ukrainian Black Sea coast. Prince Grigori Potemkin commanded the Russian forces alongside General Alexander Suvorov.

Unlike Suvorov, Potemkin did not believe in pressing a direct assault. He decided to besiege the fortress and rely on cannon fire instead. The Russian army laid siege for over 6 months. This strategy prevented many Russian casualties from battle, but many soldiers succumbed to various diseases during the long siege.

On August 18, 1788, during one of the Turkish sorties, the Turks counterattacked the Russian chasseurs (light infantry), and Kutuzov was shot in the head for the second time.

Prince Charles-Joseph von Ligne, an Austrian diplomat who appears to have been an eyewitness, wrote to Austrian Emperor Joseph II:

"The date of 29th August [Julian calendar] not more than forty Turks driving through the sea ascended the cliff and approached to fire from their rifles onto the [Russian] troops where Prince Angalt had exchanged command from Kutuzov. That person who during the last war received a bullet flying through his head behind his eyes, this bullet fortunately did not deprive him of his aforementioned [eyes]. This general received yesterday a second shot in the head, similarly to the [first injury], but above his eyes, and it seems that he would die today or tomorrow."

De Ligne described watching the event through an embrasure (an opening in the fortification wall), noting that Kutuzov wanted to do the same and was injured at that moment. Kutuzov's chasseurs then rushed to take revenge for their general, driving away the 40 Turkish soldiers, who were immediately supported by 300 more — leading to an escalation of the battle.

Kutuzov fell, grabbed his head, and inquired why de Ligne had asked him to view above the embrasure at that particular moment. Those around him expected he would die immediately, but after a few minutes, Kutuzov stood up and resumed involvement in the army's maneuvers. There was no doctor nearby, so Kutuzov continued to give orders; however, due to weakness from blood loss, he was eventually carried from the battlefield by soldiers and delivered to a military hospital in Ochakov.

The Conflicting Accounts of the Second Injury

Just as with the first bullet, historical reports of the second injury vary considerably:

• Sinelnikov's version: The second bullet injury was similar to the first — the bullet went from one temple to the other behind both eyes.
• Parkinson's version: Kutuzov "jerked violently in his saddle and slid from his horse. A musket ball had entered his right temple, in almost exactly the same place as the one 15 years before, and had torn a similar path to erupt beside his right eye. Kutuzov was dragged unconscious from the fight and carried to the surgeons."
• Massot's version (the most reliable): The surgeon wrote to Potemkin, who appended the report to his letter to Catherine II: "His Excellency the Major General Kutuzov was wounded by a musket ball from his left cheek to his back of the neck. Part of the internal angle of the jaw was destroyed. The location of the affected injured parts of the body, close to the organs essential for life, made the general's condition very bad. He was considered to be out of danger only on the seventh day [after injury] and keeps improving."

The authors emphasize that Massot's note is a primary source and the most reliable evidence for determining the side and location of the second bullet injury, which recorded it as entering the left cheek, destroying part of the internal angle of the jaw, and exiting at the back of the neck (occiput).

Supporting this version are the memoirs of V. Suvorov and Kutuzov's grandson, Pavel, which describe the entrance in the cheek with an occipital exit. Leo Tolstoy, in War and Peace, also described the scar from this injury: "Prince Andrew glanced at Kutuzov's face only a foot distant from him and involuntarily noticed the carefully washed seams of the scar near his temple, where an Ismail bullet had pierced his skull, and the empty eye socket."

Catherine II was especially worried about Kutuzov after this second wound. Based on Massot's note, she repeatedly wrote to Potemkin:

• August 31, 1788: "Describe to me how he is doing and how he was wounded, and order someone go to see him regularly on my behalf"
• September 18, 1788: "Order someone go to see him regularly on my behalf, to see how Major General Kutuzov is doing. I am really sorry about his wounds"
• November 7, 1788: "Describe to me how he is doing"

It is unknown whether the second injury was from a musket ball or a bullet. The bullet's trajectory was level or slightly oblique — from the maxillary area (upper point, near the cheekbone) traversing to the occiput (lower point, back of the skull). The distance between Kutuzov and the Turkish troops was approximately 200 yards, which was within the effective range of the weapons — meaning the bullet had enough energy to pass through the face and skull base.

Despite the severity of the wound, Kutuzov recovered quickly and returned to the army within 4 months — though his right eye deviation and headaches were recorded as becoming worse.

Massot: The Unsung French Surgeon

The authors shine a spotlight on the man they call "the unsung hero of this saga": the surgeon Massot (referred to as "M. Massot"), a French surgeon serving the Russian army. Relatively little is known about his life, but his surgical expertise almost certainly saved Kutuzov's life on at least one — and possibly both — occasions.

Massot's report to Potemkin is preserved because Potemkin appended it to his letter to Catherine II. It is a remarkably clear, concise medical note for its time, documenting the bullet's entry point (left cheek), the destruction of the internal angle of the jaw, the dangerous proximity to vital organs, and the patient's critical condition for the first 7 days before gradually improving.

The authors note that Massot is not confirmed to have been present at the first battle (1774), though later accounts credit him with treating Kutuzov for that wound as well. Whether he treated Kutuzov once or twice, his careful wound documentation and post-operative monitoring represent an early example of structured neurological trauma assessment.

Long-Term Effects of the Bullet Wounds

Kutuzov carried the physical consequences of his two head wounds for the rest of his life. The medical analysis in this study helps explain what likely happened inside his head:

Likely Damage from the First Bullet (1774)

The first bullet probably caused damage to the basal areas of the frontal lobes (the lower front part of the brain). This could explain his persistent headaches, dizziness, and the chronic wound weeping that suggests a cerebrospinal fluid leak and chronic meningitis. The outward deviation of his right eye suggests injury to the superior oblique muscle (one of the muscles controlling eye movement) and possibly the trigeminal nerve (the nerve responsible for sensation in the face).

Likely Damage from the Second Bullet (1788)

The second bullet likely did not cause a direct injury to the brain or the eye itself, but it probably:

• Destroyed the internal angle of the mandible (jawbone)
• Caused ptosis (drooping of the eyelid)
• Injured the superior oblique muscle, worsening the right eye deviation
• Injured the trigeminal nerve

Over the years following the second wound, Kutuzov's vision in his right eye gradually diminished. He complained of photophobia (sensitivity to light) and increasingly severe ocular pain.

Sinelnikov recorded that Kutuzov's vision in his right eye remained "actually quite good" until 1805. At that time, while with the army in Koshov, Hungary, Kutuzov noticed his eye began to close. Doctors vainly tried to help him, but Kutuzov was not cooperative about taking prescribed medicines. Having read about an eye ointment, he called in the doctor and ordered him to prepare the ointment at once — despite the doctor's assurances that it would not help and could even be harmful. This episode illustrates both Kutuzov's stubborn character and his worsening eye condition.

Tolstoy's description in War and Peace of the "empty eye socket" suggests that by the time of the 1812 campaign, Kutuzov may have lost vision in the right eye entirely, with the eye itself appearing sunken or disfigured.

The Road to 1812: Defeating Napoleon

In 1792, despite his role in the recent war against Turkey, Catherine II appointed Kutuzov as ambassador to Turkey. He proved to be an adept diplomat, remaining in Constantinople for about 12 months and restoring satisfactory relations between the two countries.

Years passed, and Kutuzov continued to serve Russia through various military and diplomatic roles. Then came the defining moment of his career: 1812.

As Napoleon's Grande Armée — one of the largest armies ever assembled in European history — approached Moscow, Kutuzov made a fateful decision. He realized he could not confront Napoleon directly in a pitched battle. Instead, he strategically retreated from Moscow, deliberately refusing to engage, and submitted the French army to the harsh Russian winter and relentless attacks by Russian cavalry.

This strategy, which he had first contemplated decades earlier while studying George Washington's campaign against the British, worked. Napoleon's devastated army was forced into a catastrophic retreat back to Paris, decimated by cold, hunger, and Russian attacks. The invasion of Russia — Napoleon's greatest gamble — became his greatest disaster.

Kutuzov became the personification of Russian spirit and character, honored as a national hero and savior of Russia. He died on April 28, 1813, less than a year after his greatest triumph.

The authors argue that Kutuzov's survival of two nearly mortal head wounds "created the legends, additional mystery, and drama surrounding him, not the least astonishing of which was the skilled neurosurgical care that probably saved his life." Had Kutuzov died on the battlefield in 1774 or 1788, the course of world history would likely have been very different — Napoleon might well have conquered Russia, and Europe's balance of power might have shifted dramatically.

What This Story Means for Neurosurgery

This historical case offers several lessons that remain relevant to modern medicine:

1. The importance of wound documentation: Massot's precise description of the bullet's entry point, trajectory, and associated damage provided crucial information for patient care — the same principle that guides trauma surgeons today.
2. Survival from penetrating head injuries is possible: Even in the 18th century, without antibiotics, imaging, or modern surgical techniques, a patient could survive a through-and-through bullet injury to the head with appropriate wound care, infection control, and supportive treatment.
3. Long-term sequelae are common: Kutuzov's experience — headaches, dizziness, cranial nerve palsies, CSF leak, meningitis, and progressive vision loss — mirrors the challenges faced by modern survivors of penetrating brain injuries.
4. Ballistics matter: The type of weapon, caliber, trajectory, and distance all influenced the outcome. The authors note that Kutuzov "could not have survived" a standard military musket ball producing a through-and-through cranial injury at close range — his survival likely depended on a smaller-caliber projectile and an oblique trajectory.
5. Preservation of function: Despite the severity of his injuries, Kutuzov retained enough cognitive and physical function to command armies and outmaneuver one of history's greatest military tacticians.

Limitations and Historical Uncertainty

The authors are careful to acknowledge the limitations of studying a historical medical case from more than 200 years ago:

• Many primary accounts of Kutuzov's injuries did not originate with eyewitnesses, and those that did are often contradictory.
• There are calendar discrepancies between the Julian and Gregorian systems, further complicating the timeline.
• The exact type of weapon and bullet used in either attack is not known with certainty.
• The precise location and trajectory of the first bullet remain uncertain, with various historical sources disagreeing on entry and exit points.
• Massot is not confirmed to have been present at the first battle, so his role in the first injury is uncertain.
• The diagnosis of chronic meningitis and CSF leak is inferred from Kutuzov's symptoms (headaches, dizziness, chronic wound weeping), not confirmed by any direct medical record.
• "Eye" in some historical accounts is ambiguous — it could refer to vision or the physical eye itself.

Despite these uncertainties, the authors conclude that Massot's note — a primary source document preserved through Potemkin's correspondence with Catherine II — is the most reliable evidence for determining the side and location of the second bullet injury.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can someone really survive a bullet through the head?

Yes. Field Marshal Mikhail Kutuzov survived two head gunshot wounds, in 1774 and 1788, before antibiotics, modern imaging, or sterile surgery existed. Doctors expected him to die both times. His surgeon, Massot, wrote that fate must have appointed Kutuzov to something great, since he lived after two injuries that were a death sentence by all the rules of medical science.

What long-term problems followed the head wounds?

Kutuzov had severe headaches, dizziness, and chronic wound weeping, which the authors suggest points to chronic meningitis possibly from a cerebrospinal fluid leak. His right eye turned outward, and later he developed drooping eyelid, light sensitivity, worsening eye pain, and gradually diminishing vision in that eye. These problems mirror challenges faced by modern survivors of penetrating brain injuries.

Why did he survive when the wounds seemed fatal?

The authors suggest several factors: the bullet may have come from a smaller-caliber hunting-type rifle, and because Turkish troops fired from uphill while Kutuzov descended into a trench, the bullet path was oblique, possibly reducing damage. They note he could not have survived a standard army musket ball producing a through-and-through cranial injury at close range.

What did the treating surgeon record about the second wound?

Massot, a French surgeon with the Russian army, wrote that Kutuzov was wounded by a musket ball from his left cheek to the back of his neck, with part of the internal angle of the jaw destroyed. He recorded that Kutuzov was considered out of danger only on the seventh day. The authors call this note the most reliable evidence for the second injury.

How long did recovery take after each head wound?

After the first wound, Kutuzov was kept in a dark room for six weeks and the wound healed slowly. After the second wound, he recovered quickly and returned to the army within four months, though his right eye deviation and headaches worsened. He also spent two years touring European clinics, which appears to have benefited his health.

What does the case suggest about modern care for penetrating brain injury?

The authors draw several lessons: precise wound documentation guides trauma care; survival from penetrating head injury is possible with wound care, infection control, and supportive treatment; long-term problems such as headaches, cranial nerve palsies, and vision loss are common; and ballistics, meaning weapon type, caliber, trajectory, and distance, influence outcome.

How certain are the details of these historical injuries?

The authors acknowledge uncertainty. Many accounts were not from eyewitnesses and are contradictory; calendar differences complicate the timeline; the exact weapon and bullet are unknown; the first bullet's location and trajectory remain uncertain; and the chronic meningitis and cerebrospinal fluid leak diagnoses are inferred from symptoms, not confirmed by any direct medical record.

When should a patient with a penetrating head injury seek a second opinion?

A penetrating head injury can leave long-term effects such as headaches, dizziness, cranial nerve palsies, cerebrospinal fluid leak, meningitis, and progressive vision loss. A second opinion is reasonable when the diagnosis or imaging interpretation is uncertain, when the recommended treatment or surgery is unclear, or when symptoms persist or worsen despite care. Because historical accounts of such injuries are often contradictory, careful review of wound documentation, trajectory, and associated damage matters. Diagnostic Detectives Network provides independent expert second opinions.

Source Information

Original Article Title: neurosurg-focus-article-pE3

DOI: 10.3171/2015.3.FOCUS1596

Authors: Sergiy V. Kushchayev, MD; Evgenii Belykh, MD; Yakiv Fishchenko, MD; Aliaksei Salei, MD; Oleg M. Teytelboym, MD; Leonid Shabaturov, MD; Mark Cruse, PhD; and Mark C. Preul, MD

Journal: Neurosurgical Focus, Volume 39, Issue 1, Article E3, July 2015

DOI: 10.3171/2015.3.FOCUS1596

Funding: The research was funded by the Newsome Family Endowed Chair of Neurosurgery Research and the Barrow Neurological Foundation.

Note: This patient-friendly article is based on peer-reviewed research published in a medical journal. It has been written for a general audience while preserving the original study's data, findings, and conclusions. It does not constitute medical advice.