THE MYTH OF GURKHA RIFLEMAN CARRYING PRIVATE

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by spiral

While I agree with your sentiments & conclusian Gavin , I must also point out in all fairness that many non Gurkha British troops also carried private purchase kukri in that theartre at that time.

Spiral

Well noted Spiral and well presented with an Image Berkley. All factors are important for any discussion or conclusion.

Gav

[inveterate]

For what it is worth I have a non issue Kukri that was carried by an officer (later to be CO 5th GR) in Burma during WW11 and later in conflicts with Pakistan and the Naga Wars.This Kukri comes with impeccable provenance. So whilst it might not have been the norm it certainly did happen. Rod

[sirupate]

Jonathan; As for the Argument put forth by Simon although interesting, Id rather take the word of the offcial "Brigade of Gurkhas" website myself for several reasons.

Jonathan, I believe the info you are referring to has been taken of the Gurkha web site (http://www.army.mod.uk/infantry/regiments/13192.aspx).
I presented this information to the GM, and other Gurkha Officers (in early 2009, before the re-vamped MOD site), who accepted my findings.
(The whole précis I did was originally done for the Nepal Army Museum in Kathmandu, by request.)

Jonathan; Not least that they know rather more Gurkhas & Gurkha officers than the esteemed few Simon has spoken with, who according to Simon were apparently unaware of such practice?

According to them Jonathan, there was no such practise allowed. One would have thought they would know after all, as they were there as Officers (you and I of course were not Officers in WWII, and therefore do not have their knowledge) fighting the Italians, Germans and Japanese, part of their job was of course to enforce the Regimental Regulations. Also these few Officers new many other Officers very well, from different Battalions and Regiments, i.e. JP knowing Brigadier E.D. Birdie Smith (recommended for a VC) and so on, and for example JP also interviewed some 450 Gurkha veterans for his book ‘Gurkhas at War’.

Jonathan; And of course to describe it as a "myth" is rather strange , the idea that no Gurkha would ever buy or use a kukri he liked in the arms emporiums that riddled so many British Indian Garrison towns & Hill Stations were Gurkhas would take local leave.{Or from Nepal if he was lucky eniough to have home leave.

I think one has to wonder why they would buy another kukri Jonathan.
1/As JP said “I can't quite see why a man would have changed his issue kukri for a personal one when at home as he could have got a new issue one when he got back to his holding unit or his battalion”
2/ Also as Chas had to say “all men wore the same as otherwise if they used their own, there would be no standardisation” “All men carried regulation IA kukris”,
3/ Not to mention QGO Capt Bakansing Gurung Joined 1933 (plenty of time for home leave!), "That none of his contemporaries had ‘private kukri’, all carried issued kukri".
4/ Then there is QGO Captain Bhaktasing MC, “They have not taken their own village kukri to the regiment. He has not taken any his own kukri from Nepal.”
5/ Major Deny’s Drayton (who was in both the N. African and Italian campaign)
Had this to say; “Gurkhas only carried IA issue kukri, no private kukri were carried”.
I also have a kukri that was taken back to Nepal by a Gurkha when WWII finished to have as a user in his village (which I picked up in Nepal), which has a good quality Nepalese scabbard. I also have handled a Mk1 that taken back to Nepal as a user (which has the nut ontop of the handle, due to repair), and this certainley fits in with what QGO Captain Bhaktasing MC had to say about kukri, which rather fly's in the face about Gurkhas getting their own kukri.

Gav; if it didn't come with the unbroken linage and original post marked and dated shipping crate I wouldn't be wasting the time with the notion but it does kinda debunk the fanciful notion that private purchase Kukri were never used by Gurkha in WWII.

Please explain in what way does it debunk what QGO's and British Gurkha Officers have to say, who were after all there fighting in WWII? It seems strange that you seem to ignore what the Gurkhas have to say that were there?
Also your kukri was collected off a dead Japanese soldier, and there were plenty of domiciled Nepalese in Burma during WWII lets not forget, who helped many a British and Indian army soldier when in need.
It quite possible the Japanese soldier acquired the kukri from one of them, although I do not know about Japanese regs regarding carrying of non issued equipment, except in regard of Officers carrying family heirloom Nihonto.

Gav; In a war zone no one is going to be looking at his mates Kukri next to him and be thinking hey, that really doesn't look like mine I'll be telling the CO when we get through with this, heck I don't even think the CO would care if the job was done so long as next time they are on regimental parade he is displaying the correct kit.

This was strictly against protocol of the time (Covered a bit later), for all British and Indian army troops, this does not apply to souvenir hunting off the dead or wounded enemy, and it is certainly not the mind set of Gurkha from the hills Nepal back in the 1940’s (ref JP) where little had changed for hundreds of years.
Also in General Sir Walter Walkers (a good friend of JP’s) autobiographical book, ‘The Fighting General’ by Tom Pocock, Walter Walker 2nd in command of 4/8th GR in Burma having replaced Colonel Twist after he was killed (later taking full command), covers how strictly enforced regimental standards and regulations were upheld, and how inspections were frequent and closely done.
There was an occasion when he found a Gurkha with a dirty kukri, he was not best pleased, goodness knows what would have happened if it was not an IA regulation issue!!
This is one of his slogans that he had his troops digest and act on; ‘It is the ambition of every man of the 8th GR to redden his kukri and bayonet in the enemy’s blood’.

Berkley; Great picture; Indeed, there were many possible routes by which a private-purchase kukri could have come into Japanese hands:

Very well pointed out;

Rod; For what it is worth I have a non issue Kukri that was carried by an officer (later to be CO 5th GR) in Burma during WW11 and later in conflicts with Pakistan and the Naga Wars.This Kukri comes with impeccable provenance. So whilst it might not have been the norm it certainly did happen. Rod

First thing about the above Ron the article isn’t dealing with Officer Carry, however was your kukri carried by a British Gurkha Officer who stayed with the regiment post 1947, or Sikh Officer who then later joined the Gurkhas post 1947? ETC Further info would be very usefull. Below is some info on Gurkha Officer carry in WWII;

British Gurkha Officer carry in WW2
First of all not all British Offices carried kukri as JP recalls “I never carried a kukri, along with several other British Officers”
However many did; such as Major-General M. Callan who used a Quarter Master issued kukri, as he recalls “I am sure I wore a kukri in combat uniform, a QM issue like everybody else in the battalion, which must have been 90% ‘hostilities only’ enlistments apart from only one BO (the CO) and GOs and older ORs from pre-war” .
Major-General Mike Callan sent details of his kukri, and they are as follows;
“I have dug out my old issue kukri from the garden shed. It has been used as a utility tool in the garden, just as a Gurkha would. (You know of course that the common belief that kukris can only be drawn to shed blood is complete nonsense). Mine is now very battered and rusty, but after reading your notes I took a closer look at it. The first thing is that it has no maker's mark, and seems to differ from the ones you described.
The dimensions are: Length from tip of blade to tip of handle - 42 cm. From the tip of blade to the start of the angle (approx 15 degrees) on back of blade - 19.5 cm, and from there to the join at handle - 12.5 cm. Depth of blade at widest part - 5.3 cm, and thickness of blade at back before it tapers down towards the point - 7 mm.
The hardwood handle is 10.5 cm long, with a steel plate on the end, and has two steel bands round (to prevent splitting) and is secured to the blade by two rivets. The centre of the handle is carved to provide the grip. It is a nicely balanced weapon with a good "feel”. The weight is 548 gms.”
Since the correspondence Major-General Mike Callan kindly sent me down his kukri so I could handle it and document it for myself. It is very similar to one in the GM, which has a different Kaudi and brass rings and butt plate.
Major-General M. Callan IA QM issue kukri from WWII;


Chas and some other Officers had their kukri made by the armourers; Captain C. McCalla recalls “…have my own kukhris which were made for me by the (Regimental) armourer in Dharamsala”. I have only seen pictures of Captain McCalla’s kukris and the one he carried not only looks like a very nice and well made kukri, it also has as Captain McCalla points out, the perfect balance for a kukri.
When asked why some Officers carried Quarter Master issue kukri, some not at all and some like himself who had kukri made for himself this was his explanation regarding his Battalion “Not all Officers went to the Regtl Centre & therefore wore issue kukri from the QM. Many Officers were commissioned in India & joined Gurkha Regiments (seconded from Brit Army & were never in the Indian Army). Others like myself were commissioned in UK & volunteered to join a Gurkha Regt. We were then gazetteered straight into the Indian Army proper.”
A picture of one of Chas's Gurkhas (No.1 Bren, No2 had just been killed) after some fighting in Abya;

And here are Chas's kukri;


Another Article that didn't seem correct.
With kind permission of the Burma Star Association;
This is part of an article by Mr. Hannah’s son of his father’s recollections (Trooper 2884497 William Hannah of the 9th Gordon Highlander’s) of his experiences in WWII, who passed away in the late 1990’s.

'Out at the defensive perimeter, the Gurkhas were stationed, 2 men to a trench. It was standard practice never to put 3 Gurkhas in a trench, as with 2, one will guard, 1 will sleep. With 3, 1 will watch, 1 will sleep, and 1 will strip off, grease his body, and draw his Ancestral Kukri to go looking for Japanese souvenirs. Only this blade requires to taste blood before returning to it's sheath, not the Sheffield steel one that the army issued, that was used for splitting sticks and opening tins, and could be obtained simply for the asking, as it had no honour. If a Gurkha fell in combat, his comrades would retrieve his Ancestral Kukri, for return home, and vesting with the next eldest son. Gurkhas were not normally seen carrying bayonets, preferring the Kukri. *At Kohima, it is said that a Japanese officer carrying his traditional Samurai sword and a Gurkha soldier squared off at knife fighting distance in a trench, and both drew steel'
* I have come across 3 rcorded incidents of Gurkhas fighting with kukri against Japanese sword, and JP in his 450 interviews came across one instance.

This is an interesting article, in that it has been used by some collectors and kukri enthusiasts (it is with reluctance that I looked into an old soldiers story and recollections, who fought for our freedom, but I felt much was wrong with the article), as in part of using to prove the both the carry of so called ‘private’ kukri and so called ‘ancestral kukri’.

This is what Chas had to say about it; “Dear Simon, I can only say that with regard to any wild stories about Gurkha's....... just believe it. !!!!!!!!!!” (In other words a load of nonsense)
Then Chas had this to say; “It is more than likely that some kukhri's were handed down in their home & in that respect they could be deemed Ancestral” This was in respect to their home in Nepal, and as Chas (and others) had said previously “All men carried regulation IA kukris”,

The Curator of the Gurkha Museum, Major Gerald Davies had this to say;
“Dear Simon, I have never heard of the practice for trenches described below. In war, section strengths are dependant on casualty figures and continued reinforcements to replace the casualties. Normally a section is 8 x men. To say there will be 2, 3 or 4 men per trench is not realistic, as it depends on the ground, the width of the defensive layout, the enemy tactics they use against you, and the role of the unit (offensive or defensive). You do the best with what numbers you have. The story of greasing bodies is fanciful I am afraid – I have never heard or seen any tactical books advocating this action. The drawing of kukris and tasting blood is also a myth that has no truth or reality. The kukri is a utilitarian implement as well as a weapon. Sheffield steel is not used in kukris, so that is fanciful – rail steel or car springs make up the majority of kukri blades in the past 65 years. The retrieval of ancestral kukris for return home is also fanciful. If a soldier died in service his possessions were* auctioned in Company level auction sales to raise the best price. The total money accrued was then sent to the deceased family.
Gurkhas did carry bayonets and many photographs show that to be the case. It was part of regimental dress regulations for combat dress. In restricted areas such as jungle, in buildings (FIBUA), trench warfare, the kukri was favoured by Gurkhas over the bayonet”.
*This is very well described in the Book ‘Quartered Safe Out Here’ by George MacDonald Fraser

JP had this to say: mostly nonsense. I had not heard about 'greasing the body' but I very much doubt it, where would a man have got the grease from?
JP also remembered that a Gurkha did come back in just under dress in WWI, in France with just his kukri, but had this to say on the subject; “I cannot for the life of me think why a man, especially one from a country where it probably would not
be so cold, in the cold of November (when it happened, towards the battle of
Neuve Chapelle) would want to go hunting for souvenirs, especially at night,
which could be picked up almost anywhere on the battlefield - as my father
did. I expect he went on a one-man raid - or sat in a pile of shit and felt the only way to go on was in bare buff.”
JP also said that in 450 interviews for his book (Gurkhas at War) nothing like that was mentioned.

[spiral]

2 kukri displayed at the Gurkha museam as battlefield or theartre pickups. The top one in Egypt probably from the 3rd Gurkha rifles the lower one from Gallipoli in 1915.

Neither look very official issue or standarised to me....





& then again 4 Gurkhas in WW1 displaying there kukri. Again not very standardised. Looks like at least 3 different types of kukri to me. {picure courtesy of PCpostCards.]

Spiral

[sirupate]

Jonathan; 2 kukri displayed at the Gurkha museam as battlefield or theartre pickups. The top one in Egypt probably from the 3rd Gurkha rifles the lower one from Gallipoli in 1915. Neither look very official issue or standarised to me....

Jonathan, please at least get the quote correct from the GM, as it puts a whole different emphasise on the kukri one looks at, and is quite misleading;
“acquired by a trooper of the Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars, c.1917 in Egypt, and is potentially from 3rd Gurkha Rifles.”

1st Kukri;The quality of the kukri has in reality only two potential sources;
1/ Lets not forget that this practise was only done if time allowed;
‘If a soldier died in service his possessions were auctioned in Company level auction sales to raise the best price. The total money accrued was then sent to the deceased family’
It is feasable that the kukri was a dead British Officer's kukri, whose face and uniform may have been badly mutilated, and this may have been the reason behind the word ‘potentially’.
2/ That it was a kukri for mess orderlies, here the word ‘acquired’ springs to mind!

Before we go into the second kukri this is what I had to say in my précis about this period, which is relevant to this section;
There is a picture of British Gurkha Officers, of 1/1st Gurkha Rifles, in discussion with Nepalese Gurkha Officers in France during WWI. From the picture it would appear that the British Officers are not wearing kukri, but that the Nepalese Gurkha Officers are. In foreground, of the picture, one of the Nepalese Gurkha Officers is wearing a kukri on his left hip, which has what appear to be metal rings going around the handle and a metal butt plate, and another Nepalese Gurkha Officer (a bit further into the photo) is wearing a wooden handled kukri, again on his left hip, rather than the regulation carry of rifleman on the centre back, or the right back. In WW1 Nepalese Gurkha Officers including Naiks and Havildars etc. were allowed to carry personnel kukri.

2nd Kukri;Displayed directly below the alloy handled kukri in a green scabbard, is a kukri potentially used by10th Gurkha Rifles, and was picked up by Naval Officers during the Gallipoli campaign. We also have to remember that the 2/10 GR had problems getting hold of kukri, and ended up making them themselves for the new recruits, of which I have one.

& then again 4 Gurkhas in WW1 displaying there kukri. Again not very standardised. Looks like at least 3 different types of kukri to me. {picure courtesy of PCpostCards.]

Second picture;First of all, it does seem strange to me that one would present a picture as evidence, without knowing the circumstances and background behind the picture!!
Before we cover that, it is well known that there were huge supply problems for kukri and equipment in general (ref; 2/10 GR.) during WW1, due to the huge influx of men, which would not have been catered for in the normal run of things. Of course this was the same in WWII, for example the new 8th GR training centre at Quetta, by 1943 suddenly found itself with 6,000 Gurkhas!!
Regarding the problems of obtaining kukri, JP had this to say ‘If Ordnance Branch asked Regimental Depots to help out and held a pool of such to supplement other sources, then yes, If not no’. In other words, other sources were used to obtain what kukri they could get. This of course would lead to variations, but the kukri would still be ‘Sarkari’ issue.
Also one has to take into account that to replace Gurkha casualties in 1914 and 1915, they milked other Gurkha Battalions from India for replacements, therefore Gurkhas from different battalions were often mixed in.

So about this picture you have presented;
1/ The Havildar on the left; is not of rifleman rank, and was entitled to carry his own kukri, if he so wished, this did not appear to be the case By WWII.
2/ The two middle Gurkhas; They may well have been pr-WW1 enlistments, with Battalion regulation or original Sarkari issue kukri, from when they joined.
3/ The Gurkha on the right; He may well have originated from another battalion, so a different style of issue kukri, or it may be a replacement Sarkari sourced issue kukri, but not his own private purchased kukri!



Once again there are in reality only two possibilities, it was a British Officers kukri, or a Nepalese Gurkha officers kukri, as mentioned before.
Indeed British Officers often wore large kukri in that period, as you know, I have one from that period, spec; It has a 39cm long blade of the Rana period style, a belly of 7.1cm, a smooth spine, with a width of 9mm by the handle, tapering down to 2mm just before the point, and a ridge-less, hollow forged cross section, weighing 790 grams. It has a thick wooden stick tang handle of 11.2cm in length with a nice curve to help it fit the hand. The handle has a protective metal butt plate which has a basic attachment to the stick tang. For such a large kukri it is beautifully balanced and handles like a much lighter kukri, it is possible that this kukri was made by one of the Battalion armourers.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Jonathan, please at least get the quote correct from the GM, as it puts a whole different emphasise on the kukri one looks at, and is quite misleading;
“acquired by a trooper of the Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars, c.1917 in Egypt, and is potentially from 3rd Gurkha Rifles.”

O dear...

The fact is I didnt quote the Gurkha museam re. the found Egyption & Gallipoli theartre kukris. I paraphrased it in an accurate manner.

Where as despite you accusing me of bieng missleading, you have blatenly deliberatly missquoted what the Museam Identification card actualy says.

Which Is. {& I quote.}

"This kukri which is believed to have belonged to the 3rd Gurkha rifles was aquired in Egypt c.1917 by a trooper of the Queens Own Oxfordshire Hussars."

{End quote.}

Also The Gallipoli kukri Picked up by a chief pety officer makes no referance "potentialy" or otherwise to any particular Gurkha regiment.

It pointless trying to deal in facts with someone who missrepresents evidence in this manner.

Spiral

[sirupate]

Jonathan; Where as despite you accusing me of bieng missleading, you have blatenly deliberatly missquoted what the Museam Identification card actualy says.

Strong language indeed Jonathan, to acuse me of lying, why would I lie about such a thing?
Indeed you are correct about the card on the kukri;

I confess to getting muddled up between Major Gerald Davies description of the said kukri 'potentialy' and what was said on the card.

Jonathan; Also The Gallipoli kukri Picked up by a chief pety officer makes no referance "potentialy" or otherwise to any particular Gurkha regiment.

You are quite correct, and I never said he did Jonathan, but Major Gerald Davies did so, as infact so did Gavin, it is certainley considered a kukri from 10th GR (from notes taken of when Major Gerald Davies the curator of the Gurkha museum talked to me about the kukri on display).

Jonathan; It pointless trying to deal in facts with someone who missrepresents evidence in this manner.

Strong words again Jonathan, I'll let the what the Officers and men of the Gurkhas have said, speak for themselves, which has proved that Ancestral and Private kukri carried by Rifleman of the Gurkhas to be incorrect.