Yvsa's correct. The typical Japanese NCO and Officer normally did not have much training in the use of the sword as a weapon per se'. Kendo and other sword-related martial arts were taught to all Japanese males as near as I can tell, but I would be unwilling to say that that counted for what I would refer to as "true combat" training in the way that the typical infantryman was taught to use a rifle and bayonet.
[By the way, Kendo has a much to do with real sword fighting as modern day foil fencing has to do with real sword fighting, ie, not much at all really. Kendo and sport fencing are like comparing small caliber Olympic style shooting to full-caliber combat. Yeah, the tools are kinda alike, and some skills transfer across, but there is a world of difference in the details.]
Swords were issued to both NCO's and officers (though of course, one had the option to use their own if they wished). They were somewhat more than status symbols since they were actually intended for use, but again, from what I've read, the NCO's and officers did not spend lots of time learning their swords with the type of familiarity a ninja (cough) would have.
Since I am on the topic of ninja, I think it fair to mention that the figure most of us conjure when we hear the term "ninja" is far more Hollywood and myth than reality. I mention ninja here only because it was referenced at the beginning of this thread and I take it to mean that it referred to someone extraordinarily skilled in swordsmanship.
Well, I'm on a roll, might as well continue. To be honest, if a Ghorka with his khukuri were to fight a true "ninja" equivalent or Samurai warrior armed with a Katana, my money would go heavily toward the Samurai. Or for that matter even a Medieval warrior armed with the typical Medieval style double-edged sword. And not just because the Medieval warrior or Samurai had the longer weapon.
Even though Ghorka might have been raised with a Khukuri in their hands, (as Yvsa pointed out), that is not the same thing as a warrior who spends a good part of each day learning, exploring and practicing how to use his weapons in a combat environment.
I've seen well-trained sword martial artists, both Japanese-style and Medieval European and all I can say is, if anyone here had seen what I have they would have to give the Ghorka credit for guts, but from an objective standpoint, have to conclude that the typical Ghorka is outmatched both in terms of technique and weaponry.
The typical Ninja/Samurai (most Ninja were simply "moonlighting" Samurai) was trained in a holistic fighting style sometimes referred to as Bujinkan. It encompasses a lot more than simply giving a sharp loud shout accompanied by a vicious stroke of the sword. Distance, timing, feints, traps, kicks, locks, blocks, trips and throws are all a part of it.
I participated in a Bujinkan seminar a month or so back and I was stunned. I've been a martial artist of sorts, off and on for over 30 years, and for the last several years, a sword artist as well.
I saw, learned and executed techniques that gave me a whole new appreciation for the "holistic warrior package" of the typical Samurai warrior. Prior to that for a few years I've studied and practiced the Medieval sword arts of a number of Medieval masters and their techniques are a far cry from what we have had shown to us on the silver screen.
Instead of slow lumbering armored warriors clumsily crashing their big ol' 10, 15, 25 or 50-lb swords against each other in an attempt to just bash each other to the ground; or instead of long drawn out rapier duels lasting ten minutes or more (in the post-medieval age); and instead of the loser dying to a neat and single thrust to the chest, you have a dynamic, aggressive, FAST, and again, wholistic body of arts that include trapping, blocking, tripping, kicking (to the nuts as well as to the sides and backs of the knees), throwing and so on, and I mean using the guard of the sword to do some of these as well! Losers don't normally fall to a single clean thrust to chest but instead have one or more arms and/or legs completely severed followed by cuts, chops or thusts to the head.
[In the latter years of the Medieval period when armor was more prevalent, tripping or throwing an opponent off balance were common, and once the warrior was down the still-standing opponent would often times shove the sharp tip of his 2.5-4.0 pound sword into the open face of the downed warriors helm, or through the armpit, or the crotch, and do so by holding the hilt in the right hand and using his gauntletted left hand to grasp the sword blade, and thus use the sword like a short spear or bayonet. This is called "Half Swording" and provides an enormous amount of power to the thrust.]
I've seen pictures of skeletons removed from Medieval battle grave sites that are nothing short of chilling. One picture that haunts me is that of a skeleton with both his legs severed beneath the knees. He was buried with his severed legs laying next to him, and you could clearly see, based on the angle of the cleaved bone surfaces, the path the sword took as it sliced both legs off in a single stroke.
Now, all this is not meant to detract from the well-deserved fierce, aggressive, and courageous reputation of the Ghorkas. But I do think we need to keep their performance against the rather blade-phobic foes they faced in WWI, WWII and beyond in a realistic context. I mean, let's be realistic, there are literally hundreds of accounts from the 1700's on through today where entire units of troops turned and ran like hell when they saw a line of bayonets charging them, and for that matter, have read accounts of foes running from Ghorkas charging them with drawn khukuris.
Those guys would stand their ground and be shot to pieces, but the moment "cold steel" came their way, they left.
But against a non-blade-phobic opponent, skilled in the use of his weapon, the Ghorka is going to have a very tough nut to crack.
Don
