THE MYTH OF GURKHA RIFLEMAN CARRYING PRIVATE

[Gavin Nugent]

Where to now

[Rick]

Anywhere without rancor or ill feelings, Gav .

[sirupate]

Jonathan; only A month ago you were claiming the Army Bearer Corps didnt carry kukris! That is Till I prooved you wrong once again.

That was not the original debate Jonathan, it was originally about Gurkha caste being in the ABC, so far all you have done is shown pictures of Sikhs in the ABC carrying kukri? hardly proof of Gurkhas in the ABC for one, and that they (Gurkhas) are carrying Mk1 and Mk2 kukri in the ABC, is it?

"Once people were enlisted, the British seperated Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus. They separated them from each other. I don't know why, but this was British policy."
Sikhs without beards in WW1, which according to you was a no no in WW1;

Jonathan; I Think one battalion went to NWF about 1914 the other to France.

Certainly one battalion went France, the 2/8th were almost wiped out at Loos, of the 500 men in the attack, only 1 BO, 1 GO, and 49 rifleman were left! The 1/8th GR were involved in Mesopotamia campaign at Kut.

Jonathan; Leutenant-Colonel H.J. Huxfords Official history of the originaly Assam based 8th Gurkha Rifles. "The men had to pay for there own kukris,though the leather frogs were an ordanance supply."

A rare book Jonathan, and if that is the quote it is wrong indeed;
1. A question to Lt. Col, JP Cross (noted Gurkha Officer, Gurkha Historian and author) on 3/12/2008; With the issued kukri in WWII, would you say the kukri was produced as weapon first and a utility blade second?
Answer from JP; Weapon every time but also I think you will find that the Tripartite treaty lays it down, or if it doesn't the Maharaja did, that the kukri being a national weapon it HAD to be carried by every soldier. Otherwise the Indian Army then and the British Army later would not have bothered to arrange for their production or issue.
JP also siad in further correspondence, that the quality of the Battalion/Regimental kukri depended what the battalion was prepared to spend on each kukri for issue.
2. They would already have had Battalion issue kukri
3. A quote from You (Jonathan) on 10/11/2008 on IKRHS;
'Its definatly a mk.1 issue kukri blade, is the end of the tang still threaded?
I would say the numbers mean that it belonged to soldier number 108 in the 2nd battalion of the 8th regiment of the Gurkha rifles in WW1. Spiral'
Since when have Gurkhas or any other members of the Indian or British army had to to pay for their own Government Issue kit?
4.The statement not only breaks the agreement with Nepal about the supply and carry of kukri, I can't imagine Gurkhas being suddenley told that they had to pay for their entitled kukri, being to chuffed, especialy after what happened to them at Loos!
5. It fly's in the the face of what every single Gurkha, and serving WW2 Gurkha Officer, and every other book says about kukri and issue, even in the Gurkha Museums own book about the Kukri in WW1!!
6. Below are three issued 8th GR kukri of mine;
WW2 top
2/8 GR WW1 middle (Plus of course the 2/8th GR WW1 Government issue Mk1 picture on IKRHS)
Pr-WW1 bottom

[sirupate]

Regarding your quote Jonathan from Leutenant-Colonel H.J. Huxford, I can't imagine he would spell there instead of their?
Also it is even harder to imagine some 500 odd Gurkhas running around trying to buy kukri (Which we know were in short supply), that would fit ordanance frogs for kukri, which were made to fit and come with a certain type of sarkari issue kukri anyway! So these poor Gurkhas had to go and find kukri from somewhere that fitted these particular frog types, that also complied with regimental/battalion regulations on type of kukri carried? It is a very bizare statement indeed!
Can you imagine British soldiers being given frogs for their bayonets, and being told they have to pay for them (when like the Gurkhas with kukri, it is issued kit, as is the bayonet), and then go and find bayonets that fit with carry regulations, and also fit in the frogs supplied!

[spiral]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Regarding your quote Jonathan from , I can't imagine he would spell there instead of their?

The spelling mistake is certanly mine.

So first you say that Lt.Col.H.J. Huxford OBE Official Regimental history is wrong? Fascinating as he was the regiments Commanding Officer pre.ww2, Shame you besmirch such a Gurkha heros memory in this manner, rather than thinking any one man knows evrything.

Then you seem to accuse me of lying about what Leutenant-Colonel H.J. Huxford said in print Simon? Is that correct? {Please notice I havent said we only have your apparent memmory of what any gurkha officer may of said, are you sure there was no confusion there on your part?}

He also wrote a good piece about in 1944 them making there own kukris out of scrap.. .I have posted a quote about that for you before a couple of years ago.

Interesting "sikh"post card, please share a larger versian so we can read the regimental belt buckles in case the French postcard maker got the title wrong?


Why you quote Mohammad Hayats 1990 statement about seperating religions in 1941 British army I have no idea? Hardly relevant to Army Bearer Corps that was disbanded or rather amalgamated into the Indian Hospital Corps on 01 June 1920.

For the good members of this forum I should point out this discusian followed Simon saying this kukri on ebay ," seems to have Armourey Markings on it that don't seem quite right."



I then pointed out on IKRHS that I have similar marked kukris collected many years ago & it now appears so do quite a few others, The markings are genuine.


Heres a few photos of this piece. The Quetta arsenal stamp appears to be rare as its the only one to date Ive come across. {For whats that's worth as Ive only had 15 to 20 mk.1s in my hands & seen maybee another c.60 or more in photos & many thousands were obviously originaly made.}






This upset Simon enough that he came out with this on his forum.


I have to question why a member of the 3rd company (10 in all, some were based in Quetta) Indian Army Bearer corps would be carrying a kukri? and why a *different scabbard to the original? Who were mainly made up of Kahars (loosley 'a bearer') and Dooley (a bit like a Palanquin, but not as good) bearers, they would have to be very low caste Nepalese to be working in that corp, at that time, certainley not Gurkha caste!!
So no reason to issue kukri, which was only done to rifleman upwards in appropriate fighting regiments anyway.


Some Simon allegse that the Army Bearer corps were all low caste coolies etc so therfore could not. be of Gurkha ancestry.

To that I say you should also read this as well...


"and Indians in South Africa, under
the leadership of Mr. M. K. Gandhi, Barrister
at Law, organised themselves into an Army
Bearer Corps. It was touching that men of
high caste and station in life should brush
aside their pride of race and standing, and
work in the humble capacity of coolies. But
as more than one Indian who was thus em-
ployed has said to me, they cheerfully carried
the wounded British soldiers from the field to
the hospitals as their contribution towards
Britain's success."

From SAINT NIHAL SINGH Author of "India's Fighting Troops," 1914 marston press.

& some photos of ABC kukris & Men.

Ive got the names & army records of over 1500 ABC ww1 personal, the were all creeds,colours ,religeons & castes. Some were of Gurkha ancestry. {Over 1000 of them cam from the War Graves Commisions records.].

Also Brave Nepali men who served & survivd like.

Jagan Nath
Corps: Army Bearer Corps
Regiment No: 44342
Rank: Bearer

Kanshi Ram
Corps: Army Bearer Corps
Regiment No: 3532
Rank: Bearer

Harak Bahadur
Corps: 2nd Army Bearer Corps
Regiment No: 224613
Rank: Bearer


etc. etc. These names clearly show descent from the Gurkha/Gorka castes.



& as Dr. Premsingh Basnyat (Ph.D) states on his website when talking about the jobs of Nepalese army units on loan to the British Indian army.


"The impending tasks given to the Nepalese army were :-
Stretcher Bearer,Military Police,Sentry Duty,Artillery crew."

Which means even the Gurka solders from the Nepalese army Battalions KALIBOX, PURANO GORAKH, DEVI DUTTA, KALI BAHADUR, BARDA BAHADUR, SUMSER DAL, JABAR JUNG, PASUPATI PRASAD, RAMDAL, SHER, SINMHANATH, MAHENDRADAL, NAYAN GORAKH, SABUJ AND BARAKH were not above the task of bieng strecher bearers. I figure its safe to say they were of Gurkha ancestry as after all they were in the Royal Nepal Army!

Not to mention

ABC is the official identifying abbreviation & marking code of the Indian Army Bearer Corps.This code is used on Army Documents,medals & issued equipment.




Heres a partial list. from "The Collector and Researcher's Guide to the Great War" by Howard Williamson.{courtesy of National Archives.}


A & N.Z. SIG. SQUN. AIF Australia & New Zealand Signal Squadron AIF AUS
A. CYC. CORPS Army Cyclist Corps G.B.
A. CYCLIST CORPS Army Cyclist Corps G.B.
A. EMP. COY. A.I.F. Army Employment Company AUS
A. GYM. ST. Army Gymnastic Staff G.B.
A. MULE DEPOT. Army Mule Department I
A. PROV. C.A.I.F. Army Provost Corps AIF AUS
A. & S. HIGHRS. Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders G.B.
A. & S.H. Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders G.B.
A.A.H.A.I.F. Australian Auxiliary Hospital AIF AUS
A.A.N.S. Army Auxiliary Nursing Service G.B.
A.A.N.S. Australian Army Nursing Service AUS
A.B. CPS. Army Bearer Corps I
A.B.C. Army Bearer Corps I

[spiral]

Heres the ABC uniform of WW1.

& a bearer wearing it.



Close ups might help?



As a

[spiral]

point of information for those who may not realise, The Army Bearer Corps uniform including the turban was worn by all denominations,castes & religions by WW1. It was the standard uniform. It doesnt mean there Sikh, Some are without doubt but in truth & record they were mostly Muslim & Hindu with Sikhs & converted Christians in the Minority. { Curiosly most of the converted Christians were just recorded under the single name of Joseph}At one time even one of the Gurkha regiments wore turbans for a short few year period. As apparently some accuse me of desperatly scraping the barrel
on this subject perhaps I should share a little more? , to re educate you again? Heres some pictures Ive had since I first researched the ABC kukri so many years ago... Heres A mk.2 Cossipore made kukri dated 1917 & marked to an ABC unit That I picked up even before my Mk1 ABC marked kukri, alongside the ABC marked 1. {via Fort William & Queeta.}





Heres a posed photo commercialy Published in Marseile 1915. sometimes misstranslated as French Hindoos actualy it translates as Hindoos in France.





I know this because I bought this photo 8 years ago when first reasearching into the Army Bearer Corps & It features the same chap. With the same background.



There belt buckles even say Army Bearer Corps!






Threads & quotes relevent to this post.

http://torabladesforum.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=900

http://www.ikrhs.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=617



Rick,Gav,Tim etc. I have confidence in your abilitys to eventualy get to the truth amongst the smoke & mirrors.

Ive waisted one hour of my life putting this post together today.
His point is not proven.

Have fun chaps!

Spiral

[spiral]

Heres Andy Taylors kukri obtained from his long time friend Peter Prentice MBE ex Gurkha rifles officer & his statement about it.

This is Peter's khukri that he carried with him during his time in the Ghurka Rifles. As I mentioned officers weren't issued with khukris but his men presented him with this to use in the field. It was used through the whole time he spent in French Indo China. The jungle warfare scenario would have contributed to its condition. The hilt cracked and he said one of his men effected a battlefield repair with some wire. The hilt also has a chunk out of the end and the aluminium butt plate is loose. There is only one chakma and this has a square edge for honing. You will also notice that the surface is rough and this was used with a flint to make fire. Peter said the flint was kept in the leather pouch, which you will notice that the stitching has rotted. The small pointy stick was a puzzle and I assumed it was for making shavings to start a fire. Peter told me it was his tooth pick and tooth brush. He said the wooden and bristle army issue toothbrushes rotted quickly in the damp atmosphere and if a bit of stick was good enough for the men of Nepal for God knows how long it worked for him!





Its clearly a ww2 era villiger piece from Nepal or heavily Nepali influnced & garrisoned areas {such as Darjeeling perhaps}, & interesting that the riflemenmen gave their esteemed officer such a clearly private purchase village kukri & that they had it ready to hand when official issue kukris would have been so easily obtainable from army stores? & they {the gurkha ranks.] clearly thought such a piece made a more valid piece to present to an Officer for field carry.they clearly valued such a fast & balenced native piece more highly than the officail pattern issue mk.w2 or mk.3 at the time.

But one can make thier own deductions, from thios I am sure.

Interestingly many people dont realise the British army & Gurkha regiments used many captured Japanese prisoners of war {including officers.}, by rearming them in 45,46,to help quell the native desire for independance in areas like malaya & vietnam etc. in that difficult period. That always seemed so cynical & incorrect to me to use such people, given the circumstances, but I guess goverments always do what they will to control the masses.

spiral

[sirupate]

Jonathan, this thread has become so diverse with your introduction of old debates from other forums, that I have re-started on a new thread, so people will find it easier to follow.

If you want to start a new thread about Gurkhas in the ABC walking around with Mk1 and Mk2 kukri that is fine by me, if you also want to start another new thread about so called double inspection marks on the Mk1 kukri that is also fine with me as well.

In the meantime an answer to my question posed to you on this thread would be excellent;
Part two

[spiral]

Dont run away simon, Please answear the points raised on this thread, I am sure that will hope peoples clarity no end, i have confidence in the abilitys of the forumites here to gain the perception of how reliable or not, what each of us say is on these given points are,re. private purchase & the ABC questian that is still current & illustrates quite a lot about both are attitudes & usde of evidence I think?

As does Peter Prentices kukri.

Thread divergence is quite usual on this forum.

Please continue.

Spiral

[sirupate]

As I said Jonathan, start up new threads about about Gurkhas in the ABC carring Mk1 and Mk2 kukri, and a seperate thread about about so called double inspection marks on Mk1 kukri, I'll be happy to debate those subjects on the new threads.

As for Peter Prentices kukri, no problem answering that on the Part two section, providing you give an answer on there (which I noticed you avoided even on this thread) about the Mk1 2/8th kukri from WW1? or don't you have an answer for it Jonathan?

[spiral]

Originally Posted by sirupate

As I said Jonathan, start up new threads about about Gurkhas in the ABC carring Mk1 and Mk2 kukri, and a seperate thread about about so called double inspection marks on Mk1 kukri, I'll be happy to debate those subjects on the new threads.

As for Peter Prentices kukri, no problem answering that on the Part two section, providing you give an answer on there (which I noticed you avoided even on this thread) about the Mk1 2/8th kukri from WW1? or don't you have an answer for it Jonathan?

Simon this is not your own little forum that you own & moderate, this is a ethnographic arms forum, you niether own or moderate here, so you cant play god & decide who posts what & where & to dictate such to myself when all the information is already in this thread. I know you dont like it when your not in charge but on this forum your not. Thats why I left your forum years ago. Numerous argumentative posts between us is bad enough , but to litter this forum with our deitrius through numerous threads would be innapropriate to my mind.

I will do my best to answear any questian on some particular 8th GR marked mk.1 kukri you may have? whats the questian? I cant recall the thread of hand? Also how many years old is the thread?

But first please answear all the important points I raised in my earlier posts in this thread, Ive been waiting for your repley to them. Intersting debating tactic that you then decide I must answear you first. No it doesnt work like that, you answear my points then Ill answear yours.

Thats only fair.

spiral

[sirupate]

Jonathan the point about the 2/8th GR WW1 Mk1 were raised on post 33 amongst others, it is now post 43, and you still haven't answered the points raised, which indicates to me you are avoiding the points raised.
If you had checked Part Two, you will find I have even put a link to the thread on IKRHS about your comments on the Mk1.
To get things going on there so that the thread remains about Gurkha Rifleman carrying Private kukri pre-1947, without the obvious distractions of other subjects, I will answer on there about Peter Prentice's kukri Officer kukri, which is a whole different ball game to Rifleman's kukri.

[spiral]

Ok if the ABC part distracts you to much Simon, {even though you posted a small postcard photo & 1990 quote about 1941 rather than WW1 on this thread yourself for some reason?} then ignore that & lets keep on topic on this thread. I think you can manage that rather than just selecting the bits you wish to use & pretending your presenting a sound case, while ignoring the bits you dont wish to answear about private purchase kukri.

I missed your "questian" in post 33 my apogies it was hidden amongst such a rant I just passsed over it. A link would have helped.

Originally Posted by sirupate

A rare book Jonathan, and if that is the quote it is wrong indeed;

3. A quote from You (Jonathan) on 10/11/2008 on IKRHS;
'Its definatly a mk.1 issue kukri blade, is the end of the tang still threaded?
I would say the numbers mean that it belonged to soldier number 108 in the 2nd battalion of the 8th regiment of the Gurkha rifles in WW1. Spiral'
Since when have Gurkhas or any other members of the Indian or British army had to to pay for their own Government Issue kit?

{The above quote by myself is from. linky... There thats not difficult is it Simon?

My Quote from Leutenant-Colonel H.J. Huxfords Official Regimenal history
"The men had to pay for there own kukris,though the leather frogs were an ordnance supply."

Is an accurate quote, its not a blanket statement meaning evry kukri at evry time & evry place was always payed for by the inlisted men!

What makes you think its a blanket statement? After all I mentioned them making kukris out of found scrap in 1944, obviously they wernt paying for those either!

Originally Posted by sirupate

"when have Gurkhas or any other members of the Indian or British army had to to pay for their own Government Issue kit?"

You want more free kukri knowledge from me Simon?

O Well just this time.. kukri were first offcialy autherised for the 8th GR in 1881, before then they were always private purchase & carried unofficialy but obviosly sanctioned & allowed.

spiral

[tom hyle]

Well, I will read this whole thread, but my initial thought is that what official sources or leaders say about what soldiers actually do in any army in any time is close to useless/meaningless information Do you know soldiers? Their slaviness is over-rated. If their leaders are competent their interest in their soldiers' slaviness and standardization are more for outer show and inner unity and efficiency than for interfering with what works.
In other words, what would you expect the officials to say? The official line.

[sirupate]

Answered

[kronckew]

interesting photo of current practises:

the closed cho on the rather chitlangi-esque khukuri of the lance naik is interesting. the details on the ones carried by the riflemen are a bit less clear.

[sirupate]

Hello Kronck,

Certainley after WW2 the practice was very very different. When I was talikng to Lt Col. JP Cross about the W/S kukri, he remembers his men using other kukri in Jungle.
Also speaking to Captain Harding he remembers when he was an Officer, that Bandsmen kukri were chromed to smarten them, which the Gurkhas sometimes arrange themselves (often being done by the Regimental Sunar ref; GM), but he also pointed out that they were often bought and paid for by the Officers for the Bandsman, and if the kukri purchased needed to be chromed, again the Officers would often pay for that. Interstingly the kukri issued to the bandsmen at that time had had metal rings around the handle, much like Major General Mike Callan's kukri.
He also said that Rifleman with their issued kukri often went and got the scabbard covered in patent leather for parade, and purchased another for actual use.
Also Major Gerald Davies of the GM, said around 1950 the regs changed to allow the Gurkhas to carry their own kukri outside of Ceremonial and Parade duties etc. Also Major Gerald Davies was the one that pointed out the mistake that Jonathan had made about the so called private purchase Kothimora Kukri that a Bandsman was wearing, they were bought by the bands CO to brighten the Band up!
I hope that helps,

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Also Major Gerald Davies of the GM, said around 1950 the regs changed to allow the Gurkhas to carry their own kukri outside of Ceremonial and Parade duties etc.

Interesting Simon,

Did Mr Davies elaborate on why this became vogue in the 50's?

Was it perhaps because of pressure from the riflemen of the units during the war years who did have to carry private purchase Kukri at one time or another?
Perhaps because non issue kukri couldn't be managed in absolute entirely in the war years?

Gav

[sirupate]

Gav; Was it perhaps because of pressure from the riflemen of the units during the war years who did have to carry private purchase Kukri at one time or another?

Hello Gav,
Gurkha rifleman didn't carry private issue kukri in WW2 at all, and in WW1 (except GO's & BO's) information supplied from the following highly esteemed Gurkha and British Gurkha Officers, and Gurkha historians;

Authorative people;
1. Lt. Col. JP Cross British Gurkha Officer; WW2, Malaya and Borneo, Gurkha Historian and author, who was heavily involved in the book for British Gurkha Officers 'Nepal and the Gurkhas'.

2. Captain C. McCalla; WW2 British Gurkha Officer, who whilst out on patrol took pictures of of his men.

3. QGO Bakansing Gurung; joined in 1933 1/6 GR served in WW2
"That none of his contemporaries had ‘private kukri’, all carried issued kukri".

4. QGO Bhaktasing MC, served in WW2 "They have not taken their own village kukri to the regiment. He has not taken any his own kukri from Nepal.
As far he concerned those days the strong iron and better kukris are made in Dehradoon and Kunraghat by Nepali expert Ironsmith for the Gurkhas issued kukri"

5. Major Deny’s Drayton Gurkhas Officer; WW2, N.Africa and Italy

6. Major-General Mike Callan; WW2 Gurkha Officer

7. Col. Horsford; WW2 Gurkha Officer

8. Captain D Harding; post WW2 Gurkha Officer and regimental historian and archivist for 10th GR, and weapons expert for the Gurkha Museum in Winchester, and heavily involved in the book '10th Gurkha Rifles, One Hundred Years'

Gav; Did Mr Davies elaborate on why this became vogue in the 50's?

Major Gerald Davies (a specialist in Jungle Warfare) the Curator of the GM had this to say quote; 'Damaged issue kukris could be replaced through equipment exchange for free – however, numbers available for exchange were limited.
Varied between units, but in the 1950's tended to see changes to rules.'

Captain Curd; Captain R. V. W. Curd he mentions the ordering of kukri, “Part of my duties was to order replacement kukris from one of our officers stationed in Northern India whose job it was to buy them locally from makers in the area.” He aslo said this “The Gurkhas in Malaya at that time seemed to be wanting too frequent replacements for worn out knives"

I do not know the exact reason, so this is only supposition on my part, but I expect it was down to costing, or something like that, but as I say, no one has told me that was the reason, so that is guess work.

[spiral]

An interesting addendum to this thread comes from "The Lushai expedition"

Published in 1873 , Written by Lt. H.G. Woodthorpe of the Royal Engineers who served alongside the 44th Bengal infantry. { who went on through there linage to be the become the 8th Gurkha rifles eventualy.}



In full context.



Which when compared to the material published in this & the related closed thread are rather fascinating I think?

linky

{Which of coursr was closed quite correctly by are overworked unrewarded moderaters who perform such a thank less task day in or day out for no reward, due to the personal feelings clearly displayed within it. {Something that clearly shouldnt happen, within forum space...} {My apologies for that.}

Spiral

[spiral]

As a further addendum, one of my 3 top favorite 19th century Newspaper block prints of Goorkhas with kukri, {Which I bought, to frame & display alongside my kukri collection.} Its nearly 2ft wide & exhibits great skill in wood block engraving! Its a great picture to have! {Digital copies can be found elswere on line, many original copied from my example. }

Is of the Lushai expedition...




The 44th make up {not the 43rd. {mentioned in another thread.}which at that time was a seperate unit to the 44th... The clues in the number } are mentioned in the official Army "AG circular no. 117" dated 9th september 1864.

As quoted in "The Linages & Composition of Gurkha Regiments in British Service." {published by Gurkha museam.}





So clearly a mostly Goorkha & Assam Hillmen based unit, would be highly skilled at sheltor building, rather than the 22nd Punjabis, who while usefull solders wouldnt be so used to such craft & work.

spiral

[kronckew]

i note that the rifleman in the photo on the far left appears to be cheating by attempting to blow his bamboo stem in half with his rifle. sadly, by turning his head to avoid splinters, he appears to be about to shoot the bugler in the foot. interesting photo.

[spiral]

spiral