Note / Clarification: (2) In the manuscripts this name was corrupted to "Shayban", except in manuscript (Z), where there is an indication that its first letter is undotted, so it became "Sayban". The correction is from the biographical sources on "Khalid" and the books of genealogy.

Note / Clarification: (3) In manuscripts (Z, S, M) it was corrupted to "Sayl", in (B) to "Hubayl", and in the printed edition to "Hasl". The correction is from the biographical sources and the books of genealogy. In some of them it occurs as "Safi" (dropping the ya' before the fa'), and in some as "Su'ayr", with the claim that he is the nephew of Tha'labah bin Su'ayr. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr held in "al-Isti'ab" (p. 201) that the correct form is "Ibn Sayfi", and similarly Ibn al-Athir said in "Usd al-Ghabah" (1/ 580): "The better-known is the one who traced his lineage to Sayfi bin al-Ha'ilah, and he and Tha'labah meet at 'Hazzaz'."

Note / Clarification: (4) In the manuscripts it was corrupted to "Hind". The correction is from the biographical sources, and some say "Ha'ilah" instead of "Haylah".

Note / Clarification: (5) Ibn al-Athir recorded its pronunciation in "Tatimmat Jami' al-Usul" (12/ 342) as "Aslum" (with dammah on the lam), contrary to Ibn Habib. We (the editors) say: That is because Ibn Habib said in "Mukhtalif al-Qaba'il wa Mu'talifuha" (p. 27): In Quda'ah there is "Aslum" (with dammah on the lam) bin al-Hafi bin Quda'ah, Aslum (also with dammah) bin al-Qiyafah bin Ghafiq bin al-Shahid bin 'Akk, and Aslum bin Tadul bin Taym al-Lat bin Rufaydah, all of them with dammah on the lam; and every Aslam among the Arabs (i.e. other than those mentioned) has fathah on the lam. We say: this Aslum is Ibn Hazzaz bin Kahil bin 'Udhrah bin Sa'd bin Zayd bin Layth bin Sud bin Aslum bin al-Haf bin Quda'ah, and so it occurs in the books of genealogy. Thus in this lineage there are two named "Aslum" (with dammah), and here the younger Aslum has been attributed to his great-grandfather "'Udhrah".