Of bolo rush & bolomen

[migueldiaz]

Just how effective is the bolo vs. firearms? ... as stupid as the question may sound

While not efficient (casualty rate among bolomen was obviously high), just the same when employed properly tactically, the result can be effective.

Here's a continuation of Fulton's article:

Like all good guerilla fighters, the Filipinos were improvisers. They took advantage of the tropical topography with its exceptionally high grasses (well over six feet tall), dense jungles, and winding, constricted trails, to mount ambushes using a tactic called “the bolo rush”. The Philippine bolo is a fearsome, short (16” to 18”), single-edged, razor-sharp cutting weapon. Every farmer had one and knew how to use it, whether for harvesting crops, hacking trails through jungle, or taking off a limb in a fight. A large force, often 100-200 “bolo men” would lie hidden near a trail. When a smaller American patrol came along in single-file, Filipino snipers would fire, forcing them to drop for cover. At a signal, the bolo men would rush the soldiers lying prone on the trail, inevitably losing many in their ranks to rifle fire but occasionally overwhelming the Americans with their sheer numbers and the ferocity of the charge. Commissioned officers and sergeants, armed only with the Colt .38 revolver, were a primary target.

Think about it! There you are, suddenly sprawled in the mud of a narrow jungle trail, scared as hell, hearing the thud of hundreds of feet and screams in a language you don’t understand. You can’t see more than a few feet because of the thick grass and vegetation. Suddenly several blurry shapes are running towards you. And all you have in your hands is this “little popgun”. It is not a question of getting off a quick shot or two. With the Colt .38, if you did not hit each attacker in a vital part, the head or heart, the bullet would go right through the man. For the attacker it was a terrible, sharp pain but a small, clean hole that would not slow his momentum. For you it could mean death in a few seconds. Understandably there was major anger from men in the field over the inadequacy of the Colt .38 (and sometimes the limited stopping power of the otherwise excellent Krag 30-40 rifle).

Complaints were made to the Army’s Bureau of Ordinance ...

As an aside, though the clamor for a higher caliber sidearm [.45] is more associated with the encounter with the Moros, as Fulton pointed out the origins can actually be traced back to the US military's earlier experience with the bolomen of northern (Luzon) and central (Visayas) Philippines.

[migueldiaz]

Here's a 1906 New York Times article, describing a classical bolo rush tactic in action ... a trail, the few guns, the volley, and then the "rush" --

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by migueldiaz

Just how effective is the bolo vs. firearms? ... as stupid as the question may sound

Knife VS gun, I beleive very effective and more so in days of old looking at that holster. I beleive there are police stats you could draw from here too, from memory a man with a knife could be 20 feet away and rush an officer an would be upon him before the officer could draw and shoot.....

Gav

[trenchwarfare]

A bit of a twist, on "Bolo Men". Only these guys were on the other side. For those who may not know, their Model 1903 rifles are sporting the rare model 1915 bolo bayonet. Click on the thumbnail in the upper left-hand corner. http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...DN%26um%3D1the

[migueldiaz]

Originally Posted by trenchwarfare

A bit of a twist, on "Bolo Men". Only these guys were on the other side. For those who may not know, their Model 1903 rifles are sporting the rare model 1915 bolo bayonet. Click on the thumbnail in the upper left-hand corner. http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...DN%26um%3D1the

Thanks for the comment!

And I've always thought that such a huge bayonet must have meant that the Moro trooper used a barong!

[migueldiaz]

The other way of implementing a bolo rush is by using the cover of darkness.

Here's another related New York Times article:

[migueldiaz]

Another article (same thing, use of the cover of darkness):

[migueldiaz]

Originally Posted by freebooter

Knife VS gun, I beleive very effective and more so in days of old looking at that holster. I beleive there are police stats you could draw from here too, from memory a man with a knife could be 20 feet away and rush an officer an would be upon him before the officer could draw and shoot..... Gav

That's a very appropriate analogy, Gav. Thanks

Here in Manila, there's a story about a rookie policeman who tried apprehending from a distance, a petty criminal armed with a knife. Long story short -- the criminal poised to attack, then the policeman fired several rounds with his pistol but wasn't able to make any hit due to extreme stress, and the policeman ended up being butchered by the criminal.

I think though that the story is apocryphal. But maybe it's not entirely fictitious either.

Here's a more factual recap about such firearm vs. blade encounters, from the last chapter of Vic Hurley's Jungle Patrol (1938) --

In summing up the campaigns of the Philippine Constabulary [its early officers pictured below, with Capt. Henry Allen (folded arms)], a discussion of the weapons at hand or the marksmanship of the men is not sufficient to explain the greatness of these jungle campaigners. The point involved is their terrain of battle.

The rifle and the revolver and even the machine gun lose much of their authority in dense jungle. The visibility is poor and the firing range exceedingly short. The number of rounds a man can fire is limited; too quickly, the combat reaches close quarters. With a Krag rifle and a .45 Colt revolver, every Constabulary soldier of the later days had a potential firing possibility of eleven shots without reloading. He was often outnumbered twenty to one, or more than twenty to one. The principle of the campaigns involved, not the destructive possibilities of the eleven shots at his command; to be considered most was that grim element of time. In the face of a sudden bolo rush, the police often had time, for but two or three shots before the action was man to man. And against impossible odds.

For bruising shoulder-to-shoulder work, the native weapons remain the best in that jungle scene that developed them. At close quarters, the Moro kris or the pulajan talibong have destructive qualities not surpassed by the modern automatic pistol or the sub-machine gun.

The passage of a high-velocity bullet through the body is killing but not immediately fatal; sometimes, in the heat of battle, men can remain on their feet, desperately wounded, for a lengthy period of time. But the last despairing swing of a bolo blade, in the hands of a dead man riddled with bullets, could be deadly ...

The other Hurley book on swords vs. firearms, is of course Swish of the Kris (1936). The entire book can be read from here.

[Berkley]

Originally Posted by freebooter

Knife VS gun, I beleive very effective and more so in days of old looking at that holster. I beleive there are police stats you could draw from here too, from memory a man with a knife could be 20 feet away and rush an officer an would be upon him before the officer could draw and shoot.....

Gav

Quite correct:

take a common training scenario: an edged-weapon suspect charges toward an officer from a distance of 21 feet. Using averages, the attacker's first stride is at about 3 mph. But accelerating, he can reach a speed of 12 mph or more and cover 21 feet in about 1.7 seconds in about 5 steps. Considering that the average officer requires about 1.5 seconds to draw and fire one round from a Level 2 holster (not even allowing for his initial reaction time), his disadvantage in this situation is made crystal clear.

-Force Science News

[migueldiaz]

Originally Posted by Berkley

Quite correct:
-Force Science News

Thanks! I love this kind of analysis ... quantified ... and thus very specific and can be conclusive

[migueldiaz]

By the way, in the modern Philippine military, poor shots in a marksmanship class are jokingly assigned the rank of "boloman"!

The idea of course is to move away from that informal rank as quickly as possible ...

Photo below shows Phil. Marines in Patikul, Sulu.

[migueldiaz]

Going back to the topic of blades used by bolomen as documented in old photos, so far I've not stumbled into other pics.

In John Foreman's "The Philippine Islands" (1906), there's these two photos (below) of "Christian" and "Moro" blades. But it didn't say whether these are capture pieces.

Obviously though, the center Moro sword is not a capture piece -- the photo's caption is: Weapons of the Moros. (Left) “Bárong”; (right) “Kris”; (centre) The Sultan of Suluʼs dress sword, presented to the author by His Excellency.

The caption of the other photo is: Bowie-knives and Weapons of the Christian Natives. Central figure—“Talibon.” The others—Bowie-knives (Sp. Bolo, Tag. Guloc).

[KuKulzA28]

Just out of curiosity (I hope I'm not off-topic), are the majority of non-tourist Talibon made after the fall of the Spanish rule in PI? I am wondering because I remember reading of a Spanish law forbidding Filipinos from owning bolos with points to them, one of their measures to stamp out armed resistance.