Personally killed

Alexander charged Darius twice.

He fled both times.

what's with the celery sticks

It's a psychological thing

How else do you distract a hungry elephant?

Richard III was killed in the battle against Henry Tudor.

I mean, he probably wasn't actually killed by him, but whatever.

I'm pretty sure Hannibal was said to have personally killed a consul

I think Harold the Saxon was executed later, but gunpowder wasn't really available in 1016 (I think)

The Roman award of spolia opima was for such an achievement
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spolia_opima

I always make sure I directly pit my generals against the enemy general when I play Total War. It's so satisfying when the tide of the battle is turned directly from the triumph of my general's victory over his rival.

>implying its not a good weapon
Japanese celery are fold over a thousand times.

I meant with an arrow

There was an epic battle somewhere in early modern Southeast Asia between two powerful kingdoms

It was pretty badass with samurai, european musketeers, Muslim adventurers, Kshatriyas, Filipinos, etc all fighting as mercenary support

The Prince of the victorious kingdom personally killed the king of the opposition in single combat

And this battle was?

No clue what it was called

Read about it skimming a history book in uni

Isnt there this tony jaa movie about it?

This is what I'm talking about in I don't know about all those different mercenaries though, that was more of a 17th century thing.

Henry didn't finish Richard, but for a few brief moments when their staff met they exchanged blows, pretty intense considering it would have been the first and only time they came face to face, before being pulled apart and Richard getting done in by that welsh halberd.

What's funny is those Elephants are probably thinking "Wtf is wrong with humanity?!"

Battle of Hingakaka. Largest battle on New Zealand soil. 3000 beat 10000. Te Rauangaanga killed the opposing chief Pikauterangi.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mubarizun

dunno if this is what you wanted but the early muslim armies had an unit specially trained to do just that. it worked well against the persians but not so much with byzantines

I'm pretty sure elephants are violent, territorial animals and would have easily understood the conflict their human masters were engaged in, and would have even been fervently battle hungry for their masters. They were probably well trained war elephants that had seen many such battles.

Don't project your weird conceptions of peaceful nature upon animals when reality doesn't actually adhere to this conception. It's kind of pathetic.

Bohun was just a regular knight, he didn't command any troops.

>Film about William Wallace
>No film about Robert Bruce who singlehandedly won the war

Are you kidding? If I was viewing that fight even as the elephant I'd be thinking "holy shit this is awesome"

It WAS the Elephant battle.

Burma was militarily the stronkest SEAsian civilization ever, but Thailand was economically important. So when the Thai King called for helped, Portugal hired out their gunners, Assorted Malays bunked in, Spain sent their pet Filipino musketeers & assorted warriors, Hideyoshi's Japan sent Samurai, and Chinese mercenaries sniffed around for a buck.

Only 3 roman generals managed to do so i think

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Byeokjegwan

In one part of a battle, the Chinese were trapped on a hill, forcing its generals to dismount and fight on foot, and Japanese generals & high ranking Samurai spearheaded a charge uphill, to shitty results for both sides. Basically it was command staff versus command staff though both side's commanders lived to fight another day.

No sauce but im pretty sure Harold caught a arrow. I remember hearing a story about how his hauskarls form up around his corpes and protected it until their own death

They sure did

"My brother, why do you stay on your elephant under the shade of a tree? Why not come out and engage in single combat to be an honour to us? There will be no kings in future who will engage in single combat like us."

It'd make a good movie, no? Use the style of cinema they used in "The Raid" and "Ong Bak"... I'd watch it

There already is a movie.

It is absolutely corny,

>Te Wherowhero killed 150 prisoners with his favourite greenstone mere, only stopping when his arm swelled up from overuse.

Dayum

Serbian warrior Milos Obilic personally killed the Turkish Sultan Murat in the battle of Kosovo in 1389,with a knife he hid in his boot when faking surrender.

There's a folk poem in which Milos swears he will kill the Sultan,but good luck finding the English translation.

Because that shitpushing Ryker look-alike betrayed Mel Gibson and is cursed in the eyes of history.

How the fuck did de Montfort ever pulled off what he did.
The guy didn't even have stable army to fight with.

Animals don't think in terms of concepts such as humanity. They aren't even capable of speech for christ sake. Those elephants were probably thinking "Holy shit i'm fucking scared and angry better fuck up some of these weird clothed stick-swinging ape creatures"

That's a pretty small stand.

Hector and Patroclus
Hector and Achilles

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Valverde_(1385)
Shakespearean tier shit

youtube.com/watch?v=-25VXew-OV8

He was, the dude who continues to post this is a frenchboo with no knowledge of aragonese history.

Jesus fucking Christ I hope you are kidding

The sad thing is, no one else called you out on it

Is this really the quality of discussion on this board? Should I just disregard everything here?

Metal as fuck. Some lotr shit

>3000 vs 20,000
>3000 win

My god. Didn't think that was possible outside of Fantasy, let alone during a medieval pitched battle.

>impliying medieval numbers of the losers weren't always inflated

Even if it were 3000 against 6-9000 that is still a remarkable feat.

And the whole point is that the Portuguese win due to there command defeating the Castillian commander in a duel and toppling his standard thus demoralising the Castillian army and sending them fleeing, exactly what OP requested.

Medieval battle were often one sided due to the fact that most of the soldiers were peasant levies with a minimal amount of training if any at all. Morale in these types of armies were notoriously low and anything could cause a rout. Once the losing side loses all discipline it was easy for the opposing side to simply ride the enemy down