First World War Enfield Kukri

[sirupate]

Nice Photo's Chris, the Enfield mark was probably an inspection stamp, I have handled some of these kukri, but for me like the Mk4 (for different reasons) they didn't handle in the way a kukri would be expected too.
Also when you check Gurkha movements and re-supply of men during WW1, you will notice there wasn't really a resupply problem from India, as shown below.
By October 1915 due to losses the 2/8th GR (a regular Battalion) comprised of drafts of men from;
A. 1/8th GR
B. 1/3rd GR
C. Assam Rifles
D. Burma Military Police
The 1/1st GR (a regular Battalion) also had drafts of men joining throughout (initially men of the 2/4th, Assam Military Police, 3rd Gurkhas etc);
A. September 1914 arrived in Bombay
B. November 1914 arrived in France, reaching Marseilles on 1st December
C. December 1916 they left France for Basra and operations in that region
D. April 1918 departed for Koweit, eventually ending up in Egypt
E. In December 1919 they sailed back to India, in January 1920 when four months home leave was granted, approximately five years and half years later!
So I think the the 'Enfield' may simply be a question of general supply of kukri (also reference what the 2/10th GR ended up doing to supply their men with kukri) as opposed to problems getting kukri from India, as replacements from India were reasonably constant, probably wearing the kukri of their original battalion.

[Pukka Bundook]

Interesting information, Sirupate.

Chris,
I was going to comment on the different bolster in my previous post and forgot;
Interesting that it is flush with the handle, and not apparently covering the wood to any degree, as do 'normal' bolsters on kukris.
Re. supply and such;
It is intriguing to ponder why these kukris were made and for whom.
Low numbers suggest a trial run, inspected and approved at RSAF Enfield.
Possibly for British units being posted in India and associated area???

Myself, I always wonder why a kukri wasn't issued to All troops! Better chopper than any knife, whether firewood or an antagonist!

[mrcjgscott]

Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook

Chris,
I was going to comment on the different bolster in my previous post and forgot;
Interesting that it is flush with the handle, and not apparently covering the wood to any degree, as do 'normal' bolsters on kukris.
Re. supply and such;
It is intriguing to ponder why these kukris were made and for whom.
Low numbers suggest a trial run, inspected and approved at RSAF Enfield.
Possibly for British units being posted in India and associated area???

Myself, I always wonder why a kukri wasn't issued to All troops! Better chopper than any knife, whether firewood or an antagonist!

Hello Richard,

Yes, the bolster is unusual in that respect, well spotted!

It is possible that they were a trial run, the two dates certainly suggest they were only made during a specific period to fulfil a particular gap in production, possibly whilst the Indian contractors upped their own production capacity.

I still think the Western front, Egypt, etc is the most likely destination, purely for proximity reasons. Troops heading to India could easily collect them upon arrival.

It is the scabbards that really intrigue me, the idea of one universal pattern makes a great deal of sense. I suspect cost was the deciding factor in why they weren't formally adopted.

Kukri's would have been a great general issue item, but with bayonets and jack knives, I guess weight and cost issues would never have allowed it.

Kind regards,

Chris

[mrcjgscott]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Nice Photo's Chris,

Thank you Sirupate.

Originally Posted by sirupate

the Enfield mark was probably an inspection stamp

I think it is quite obviously an inspection stamp, just as one would find on swords and bayonets of the period, as I have already noted: "They are known amongst collectors as the Enfield kukri, due to the Enfield inspection marks found at the ricasso"

Originally Posted by sirupate

I have handled some of these kukri, but for me like the Mk4 (for different reasons) they didn't handle in the way a kukri would be expected too.

You are of course, perfectly entitled to your own opinion. I, and quite a few others, respectfully disagree.

Originally Posted by sirupate

Also when you check Gurkha movements and re-supply of men during WW1, you will notice there wasn't really a resupply problem from India

I think troop movements, and the manufacture and supply of kukri are two very separate things, and it would be a mistake to confuse the two.


Kind regards,

Chris