 of those who died in the first confrontation against Aḥmad. On the Ethiopian side, the main protagonist of the Chronicle, King Gälawdewos, reported the situation even better and very precisely in the letter he sent to the Portuguese king Dom João III, dated at the beginning of 1550, seven years after the victory of the decisive battle against the forces of Ahmad. It stated that “…Through your prayers God worked us great good; with the help of your men we Conquered the Moors, have always been victories over them.” The king message about the role of the Portuguese seems very significant and they became victories together with the king even in the later battles he conducted after the death of the Muslim leader Aḥmad. In the same letter the King also continued to narrate how the Portugal army became victorious against his Muslim contenders without even mentioning the role of his local armies “Cristovão da Gama with four hundred Franks could not destroy the moors; the fortunate Ayres Dias, his servant with one hundred and thirty Franks defeated and destroyed them entirely although Cristovão da Gama fought very valiantly”. The letter of the king is beyond doubt is more reliable than any of the sources that reveals the role they played have been so considerable even compared to the local armies. In the same way, the eye-witness account of Castanhoso further confirmed the fact stating that “in that country, fifty Portuguese are a greater reinforcement than one thousand natives”. Indeed, the Portuguese soldiers with the gun machine were more effective than the local armies of King Gälawdewos thus the considerable role they played was beyond doubt. On the contrary, however, in the same Chapter 19 the chronicler does not give much attention to the role of the Portuguese in the final confrontation together with the king against Aḥmad’s forces since he claims that Aḥmad was killed by one of Gälawdewos’s closer soldiers in early 1543. It reads ወሞተ፡ ኢማም፡ አሕመድ፡ በእደ፡ አሐዱ፡ እምአግብርቲሁ። (‘Imām Aḥmad was killed by the hand of one of his servants’). Thus, the chronicler ascribes the full victory to his own people, undermining the role of the Portuguese. However, both contemporary sources of the Portuguese, Castanhoso, and Bermudez, confirm that he was killed by one of the Portuguese soldiers. I think that during that time, Gälawdewos’s soldiers were not familiar with the use of a gun and it was possible only in the hand of the Portuguese.
Similarly, the chronicler also commits some errors concerning periodization. He relates the arrival of the first Jesuit missionary to the time of the king’s return from the expedition against the people of Gämbo in 1552: ‘he found in court the Portuguese envoys that were waiting for him.’ But the chronicler silenced deliberately the purpose of the coming of the missionaries.
Historically, it is known that the arrival of the Portuguese soldiers was realized after lengthy and repeated ask for military support by both King Lǝbnä Dǝngǝl and his son King Gälawdewos. Neglecting this fact, the chronicler claims that they came from across the sea since they were hungry of warfare. His statement reads በይእቲ፡ ዓመት፡ ዐርጉ፡ እምባሕር፡ ደቂቀ፡ ቶቤል፡ ወልደ፡ ያፌት፡ ዕደው፡ ኃያላን፡ ወጽኑዓን፡ እለ፡ ጽሙኣን፡ ለፀብእ፡ ከመ፡ ተኵላ፡ ወርኁባን፡ ለቀትል፡ ከመ፡ አንበሳ። (‘In this year children of Tubal, son of Japheth, strong and brave men, who were thirsty for combat like wolves and hungry for killing like a lion, landed from the sea’). In addition, the chronicler deliberately passes over the names of all the most important personalities of the Portuguese forces who came to support the king and those Jesuit missionaries who came in the half of the sixteenth century. However, the letter of King Gälawdewos indicates that he appreciated them for their support. It appears that the chronicler treats more fairly the Muslims than the Portuguese. He mentions most of the names of the military commanders of Aḥmad since the chronicler was well acquainted in Arabic language. He does not deny the defeat of the king by the Muslim army. This fact is only provided by the Portuguese sources. In 