Pourquoi Humayun il gagnait plus que son frère Kamran, il était meilleur soldat ou quoi ?
Kandahar and onward

With this Persian Safavid aid Humayun took Kandahar from Askari Mirza after a two-week siege. He noted how the nobles who had served Askari Mirza quickly flocked to serve him, "in very truth the greater part of the inhabitants of the world are like a flock of sheep, wherever one goes the others immediately follow". Kandahar was, as agreed, given to the Shah of Persia who sent his infant son, Murad, as the viceroy. However, the baby soon died and Humayun thought himself strong enough to assume power.

Humayun now prepared to take Kabul, ruled by his brother Kamran Mirza. In the end, there was no actual siege. Kamran Mirza was detested as a leader and as Humayun's Persian army approached the city hundreds of the former's troops changed sides, flocking to join Humayun and swelling his ranks. Kamran Mirza absconded and began building an army outside the city. In November 1545, Hamida and Humayun were reunited with their son Akbar, and held a huge feast. They also held another feast in the child's honour when he was circumcised.

However, while Humayun had a larger army than Kamran Mirza and had the upper hand, on two occasions his poor military judgement allowed the latter to retake Kabul and Kandahar, forcing Humayun to mount further campaigns for their recapture. He might have been aided by his reputation for leniency towards the troops who had defended the cities against him, unlike Kamran Mirza, whose brief periods of possession were marked by atrocities against the inhabitants whom he believed had helped his brother.

His youngest brother, Hindal Mirza, formerly the most disloyal of his siblings, died fighting on his behalf. His brother Askari Mirza was shackled in chains at the behest of his nobles and aides. He was allowed go on Hajj, and died en route in the desert outside Damascus.

Humayun's other brother, Kamran Mirza, had repeatedly sought to have him killed. In 1552 Kamran Mirza attempted to make a pact with Islam Shah, Sher Shah's successor, but was apprehended by a Gakhar. The Gakhars were one of the minority of tribal groups who had consistently remained loyal to their oath to the Mughals. Sultan Adam of the Gakhars handed Kamran Mirza over to Humayun. Humayun, though inclined to forgive Kamran Mirza, was warned that allowing his brother's repeated acts of treachery to go unpunished could foment rebellion amongst his own supporters. So, instead of killing Kamran Mirza, Humayun had him blinded, thereby ending any claim by the latter to the throne. He then sent Kamran Mirza on Hajj, as he hoped to see his brother thereby absolved of his offences. However Kamran Mirza died close to Mecca in the Arabian Peninsula in 1557.
À Lahore

Les quatre frères se retrouvèrent à Lahore, mais chaque jour, on les informa que Sher Shah se rapprochait de plus en plus. Lorsqu'il atteignit Sirhind, Humayun envoya un ambassadeur portant le message : « Je vous ai laissé tout le Hindustan. Laissez Lahore tranquille, et que Sirhind soit une frontière entre vous et moi. » Sher Shah, cependant, répondit : « Je vous ai laissé Kaboul. Vous devriez y aller. » Kaboul était la capitale de l'empire du frère d'Humayun, Kamran, qui était loin d'être disposé à céder l'un de ses territoires à son frère. Au lieu de cela, Kamran s'approcha de Sher Shah et lui proposa de se révolter contre son frère et de se ranger du côté de Sher Shah en échange de la majeure partie du Pendjab. Sher Shah rejeta son aide, estimant qu'elle n'était pas nécessaire, bien que la nouvelle de cette proposition perfide se soit bientôt répandue à Lahore, et qu'on exhortât Humayun à donner un exemple de Kamran et à le tuer. Humayun refusa, invoquant les derniers mots de son père, Babur : « Ne faites rien contre vos frères, même s'ils le méritent. »
### Query ###
Pourquoi Humayun il gagnait plus que son frère Kamran, il était meilleur soldat ou quoi ?

### Main Text ###
Kandahar and onward

With this Persian Safavid aid Humayun took Kandahar from Askari Mirza after a two-week siege. He noted how the nobles who had served Askari Mirza quickly flocked to serve him, "in very truth the greater part of the inhabitants of the world are like a flock of sheep, wherever one goes the others immediately follow". Kandahar was, as agreed, given to the Shah of Persia who sent his infant son, Murad, as the viceroy. However, the baby soon died and Humayun thought himself strong enough to assume power.

Humayun now prepared to take Kabul, ruled by his brother Kamran Mirza. In the end, there was no actual siege. Kamran Mirza was detested as a leader and as Humayun's Persian army approached the city hundreds of the former's troops changed sides, flocking to join Humayun and swelling his ranks. Kamran Mirza absconded and began building an army outside the city. In November 1545, Hamida and Humayun were reunited with their son Akbar, and held a huge feast. They also held another feast in the child's honour when he was circumcised.

However, while Humayun had a larger army than Kamran Mirza and had the upper hand, on two occasions his poor military judgement allowed the latter to retake Kabul and Kandahar, forcing Humayun to mount further campaigns for their recapture. He might have been aided by his reputation for leniency towards the troops who had defended the cities against him, unlike Kamran Mirza, whose brief periods of possession were marked by atrocities against the inhabitants whom he believed had helped his brother.

His youngest brother, Hindal Mirza, formerly the most disloyal of his siblings, died fighting on his behalf. His brother Askari Mirza was shackled in chains at the behest of his nobles and aides. He was allowed go on Hajj, and died en route in the desert outside Damascus.

Humayun's other brother, Kamran Mirza, had repeatedly sought to have him killed. In 1552 Kamran Mirza attempted to make a pact with Islam Shah, Sher Shah's successor, but was apprehended by a Gakhar. The Gakhars were one of the minority of tribal groups who had consistently remained loyal to their oath to the Mughals. Sultan Adam of the Gakhars handed Kamran Mirza over to Humayun. Humayun, though inclined to forgive Kamran Mirza, was warned that allowing his brother's repeated acts of treachery to go unpunished could foment rebellion amongst his own supporters. So, instead of killing Kamran Mirza, Humayun had him blinded, thereby ending any claim by the latter to the throne. He then sent Kamran Mirza on Hajj, as he hoped to see his brother thereby absolved of his offences. However Kamran Mirza died close to Mecca in the Arabian Peninsula in 1557.

### Supplementary Text ###
À Lahore

Les quatre frères se retrouvèrent à Lahore, mais chaque jour, on les informa que Sher Shah se rapprochait de plus en plus. Lorsqu'il atteignit Sirhind, Humayun envoya un ambassadeur portant le message : « Je vous ai laissé tout le Hindustan. Laissez Lahore tranquille, et que Sirhind soit une frontière entre vous et moi. » Sher Shah, cependant, répondit : « Je vous ai laissé Kaboul. Vous devriez y aller. » Kaboul était la capitale de l'empire du frère d'Humayun, Kamran, qui était loin d'être disposé à céder l'un de ses territoires à son frère. Au lieu de cela, Kamran s'approcha de Sher Shah et lui proposa de se révolter contre son frère et de se ranger du côté de Sher Shah en échange de la majeure partie du Pendjab. Sher Shah rejeta son aide, estimant qu'elle n'était pas nécessaire, bien que la nouvelle de cette proposition perfide se soit bientôt répandue à Lahore, et qu'on exhortât Humayun à donner un exemple de Kamran et à le tuer. Humayun refusa, invoquant les derniers mots de son père, Babur : « Ne faites rien contre vos frères, même s'ils le méritent. »

### Draft ###

### 1. Query Parsing

"Pourquoi Humayun il gagnait plus que son frère Kamran, il était meilleur soldat ou quoi ?"

→ "Why did Humayun earn more/gain more than his brother Kamran, was he a better soldier or what?"

Key semantic elements:
- Comparative military evaluation (gagner ≠ just "win")
- Implies systematic compensation/reward system
- Peer comparison assumption

? Translation ambiguity: "gagner plus" could mean earning more money/resources vs. achieving more militarily

### 2. Historical Context Triangulation

Mughal imperial succession crisis, early 16th century:
● Humayun (r. 1530-1540, 1555-1556)
● Kamran Mirza (son of Babur, brother rivalry)
● Kandahar-Kabul theater of operations

⚠ Response assumes specific economic/military advantages, but query suggests broader comparative assessment

### 3. Information Retrieval Challenges

◐ Multiple knowledge domains required:
- Mughal military organization/pay structures  
- Specific battle outcomes/campaign results
- Individual leadership assessments
- Economic/resource distribution patterns

! Key insight: Query asks about systematic advantages rather than individual capabilities

### 4. Logical Constraints Analysis

Physical realities:
- Mughal military relied on complex patronage networks
- Compensation typically tied to territorial control + loyalty
- Multiple variables beyond individual military prowess

∴ Response explanation requires synthesis of:
1. Territorial control advantages
2. Political loyalty assessments  
3. Military campaign outcomes
4. Resource distribution mechanisms

### 5. Response Evaluation

Provided response claims:
- Humayun's Kandahar control → resource advantages
- Persian alliance → superior military support
- Kamran's "atrocities" → reduced resource allocation
- Territorial expansion = economic gain

? Verification needed:
- Documented Mughal pay structures?
- Specific resource allocation patterns?
- Contemporary assessments vs. hindsight explanations?

### 6. Alternative Interpretations

Query could also reference:
- Political influence/access to resources
- Court position advantages
- Administrative roles vs. field commands
- Different evaluation criteria entirely

※ Response focuses primarily on military/territorial factors but other explanations possible

### 7. Critical Assessment

Response provides detailed explanation linking military success to economic advantages. However:

⚠ Potential issues:
- Oversimplified causation (military success → economic reward)
- Lack of specific documentary evidence for pay structures
- Hindsight bias in evaluating "atrocities" impact
- Possible anachronistic assumptions about modern meritocracy

● Strong historical context but ◐ uncertain about specific economic mechanisms

### 8. Conclusion

Response offers plausible explanation connecting territorial control to economic advantages, though specific details about Mughal compensation systems remain unclear. Query's assumption about military merit-based compensation may not reflect full complexity of imperial resource distribution patterns.

∴ Answer provides reasonable historical interpretation but lacks granular economic evidence to fully support claims about systematic compensation differences between brothers.

### Answer###
Humayun ne semblait pas nécessairement être un meilleur soldat que son frère Kamran, mais sa situation militaire et ses alliances lui procuraient des avantages considérables. Humayun contrôlait Kandahar, qu'il avait prise sur Askari Mirza, et bénéficiait d'un soutien persan important des Safavides. Cette aide extérieure lui donnait une puissance militaire supérieure à celle de Kamran.

Sa position était également renforcée par le fait que les nobles qui avaient servi son frère se ralliaient rapidement à lui. Humayun avait une approche plus indulgente envers les troupes qui défendaient les villes contre lui, contrairement à Kamran qui commettait des atrocités contre les populations qu'il soupçonnait d'avoir aidé son frère.

Bien que Humayun ait parfois des jugements militaires médiocre, sa capacité à attirer les forces de Kamran vers lui et à récupérer Kandahar et Kaboul grâce à l'appui de ses partisans persans démontre une habileté stratégique supérieure. Sa politique de clémence lui donnait une popularité supérieure.

Cependant, les détails spécifiques concernant les systèmes de rémunération ou les privilèges économiques accordés par l'empereur ne sont pas clairement documentés, et il est possible que ces différences de traitement aient été liées à des facteurs politiques et de loyauté plutôt qu'uniquement à des considérations militaires.