Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Hemu" in English language version.
{{cite book}}
: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}
: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}
: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}
: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}
: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)It may be recalled that as an adolescent, Akbar had earned the title of Ghazi by beheading the defenseless infidel Himu
Bairam Khan begged him to slay Himu with his own hands in order to gain the reward of Jihad (crusade against infidels) and the title of Ghazi (hero combating infiedels). Akbar accordingly struck Himu with his sword. The story of Akbar's magnanimity and refusal to kill a fallen foe seems to be a later courtly invention
Tripathi, Ram Prasad (1960). Rise and Fall of the Mughal Empire (2nd ed.). pp. 158–77.The place was strong and there was much fighting, and the father of Hemū was captured and brought alive before the Nāṣir-al-mulk. The latter called upon him to change his religion. The old man answered, "for eighty years I've worshipped my God, according to this religion. Why should I change it at this time, and why should I, merely from fear of my life, and without understanding it come into your way of worship." Pir Muḥammad treated his words as if he heard them not and answered him with the tongue of the sword.
Bairam Khan asked his royal ward to earn the title of Ghazi by slaying the infidel Hemu, with his own hands. We are told by a contemporary writer, Muhammad Arif Qandh, that he complied with the request and severed Hemu's head from his body. Abul Fazl's statement that he refused to kill a dying man is obviously wrong
Bairam Khan asked his royal ward to earn the title of Ghazi by slaying the infidel Hemu, with his own hands. We are told by a contemporary writer, Muhammad Arif Qandh, that he complied with the request and severed Hemu's head from his body. Abul Fazl's statement that he refused to kill a dying man is obviously wrong