Filipino warfare though throwing spears and throwing darts were more likely than bows in combat, although they were noted in many cases used (including the skirmish at Mactan).
Filipinos used bows for hunting/fishing mostly and those well noted esp. in skills are Negritos/Aetas. Blowguns were also mostly used in hunting.
I've always wondered why Filipinos use spears and throwing darts in combat but use bows and arrows for hunting. Is it the jungle terrain that makes spears and throwing darts more preferable in combat? But why then use bow and arrows for hunting since Filipinos are hunting in a jungle terrain also? Admittedly, most game in the Philippines is small to mid-size game, such as birds, monkeys, pigs, deer, rats, and etc. So a bow and arrow would be better perhaps. A spear has the advantage over the bow and arrow in that it is a larger weapon meaning it will deal larger damage, and humans are generally larger than most game animals. The spear can be used as a hand-held melee weapon or as a projectile but at shorter distances compared to the bow and arrow. I suppose most combat especially in a jungle or forested area will be at shorter distances, thus making the spear a possibly better weapon than the bow and arrow. The bow and arrow are more accurate at longer distances compared to the spear; hence it would be better against small to mid-size animals at a longer distance. Furthermore, spears are easy to make, cheaper, take less time to make, and require less training. Also, you will always be armed with a weapon with a spear unless you throw it, whereas with bow and arrow, you will eventually run out of arrows. Spears are better to fight in formation especially with shield where two opposing armies come together and fight in close quarters, and this is likely how a lot of ancient Filipinos fought, in relatively close quarters with shield. An opposing army could defend itself from arrows by simply carrying a shield, or hiding behind trees and bushes from a distance. You can also probably ambush someone with a spear from close distance better than with a bow and arrow. You can also charge your enemy with a spear and shield, but you can't do that with a bow and arrow.
The fact that Filipinos probably didn't fight in a flat open terrain makes using bow and arrows ineffective compared to spears. With bows and arrows, your army can fight from a long distance as long as you prevent the opposing army from getting close to you, but such a scenario isn't probably possible in the jungle and forested terrain of the Philippines. Bows and arrows were used in many parts of the world for combat, such as in Central Asia, parts of Europe, parts of the Middle East, parts of South Asia, and North America with the Mongols, Turkic tribes, the Huns, the English with their long bows, the Arabs and Persians, some Indian and Afghani groups, and many Native American Indians of North America. Perhaps their terrain favored bows and arrows versus spears in many combat situations. What's everyone's thoughts on this?
[/IMG]
[/IMG]