First World War Enfield Kukri

[mrcjgscott]

First World War Enfield Kukri

These WW1 English made kukri are few and far between, with less than 15 known specimens.

They are known amongst collectors as the Enfield kukri, due to the Enfield inspection marks found at the ricasso, similar to those found on bayonets and swords of the same period. This may be a misnomer, as at least one carries the makers details of the Sheffield Cutler S&J Kitchin Ltd, which may indicate that the whole production run was contracted to commercial firms.

All the known specimens carry date markings from either 1915 or 1916, which may indicate a short production run. They are very well made pieces, light and agile fighting kukri, produced with rat tail tangs, with blade lengths of between 12 and thirteen inches. The hilts are all made of Birch. Known examples weigh between 15 and 17 ounces.

Interestingly, they frequently turn up in English made scabbards, made by the Birmingham manufacturer A. Cooper, who is best known for manufacturing leather bayonet scabbards. These scabbards appear to be designed to accommodate all current kukri patterns, and I have seen MK I and MK II kukri turn up in these scabbards, along with Enfield examples. The interior of these scabbards feature riveted spring clips to hold the various sizes of kukri in place.

My theory is that both the kukri and the scabbards were designed to serve as replacements for lost kit, as resupply from the UK to France would be much quicker than from India. It is likely that such an order was only ever considered as a short term measure, and never intended to be a permanent supply solution, which would explain their relative scarcity.

Enjoy!

Chris

[Pukka Bundook]

Evening Chris.

Very nice indeed, and I have seen this scabbard before, but not the kukri with the Enfield inspection stamps.

I think you are correct, these being outsourced and delivered for inspection.
This is just about a certainty, as many of the parts for the Lee Enfields were made by jobbers, and the parts collected for assembly.
Very nice sweeping kukris! Straight handle, (I like a bit of bend!) but still I bet they feel good in the hand and don't try to 'escape' in a cut.

Congrats on finding such a rare bird.

Richard.

[mrcjgscott]

Thank you Richard,

I wasn't expecting much when I first handled one, but they are surprisingly comfortable and lively. The handles appear to be more geared toward gurkhas too, as opposed to the chunkier grip of the MK I.

An astute comparison with the Lee Enfield's. I suspect it was a case of "needs must" in a time of crisis. The scabbards themselves are incredibly well made, and seem to have continued in service well past the 1918. Thanks in part to their robustness I suspect.

Another small but interesting chapter in the history of kukri.

Kind regards,

Chris

[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 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

[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