_ 178 _ attack had the better of the Ormuz army. On this point, the account inspired by Cojeatar could not be more specific nor more frank. However, this frankness may be a façade: the defeat must be justified. Without going into detail, the letter lists the successive phases of the conflict: the reaction in opinion against a Christian occupation (we will note the revulsion against the sound of bells, well attested in Muslim literature); the plot hatched to take the Portuguese by surprise; the land battles, and then the naval blockade of the island of Djaroun, cut off from water, and finally the landing at Qišm, where a venerated Sayyid led the defence. The treaty of 10 October 1507, in which Ormuz agreed to pay tribute to the Portuguese king was not mentioned. The whole affair is bathed in an aura of holy war, both the Gujarati chronicler’s narrative and the letter from the king of Ormuz which he summarizes. We must not be led astray by the stylistic conventions dear to the scribes. Although Portuguese sources, more interested in the political aspect of the situation, do not state it as precisely, it is indisputable that religious fervour took charge of the resistance after the military check. But only up to a certain point. In the king of Ormuz’s letter to the King of Gujarat the economic argument
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTg0NzAy