Muhashshim ibn Suʿayd (1) ibn Sahm; and a confederate of Banū Sahm, namely Maḥmiyyah ibn Jazʾ al-Zubaydī; Maʿmar ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-ʿAdawī; ʿUrwah ibn ʿAbd al-ʿUzzā; ʿAdī ibn Naḍlah ibn ʿAbd al-ʿUzzā, together with his son al-Nuʿmān; ʿAbd Allāh ibn Makhramah al-ʿĀmirī; ʿAbd Allāh ibn Suhayl ibn ʿAmr; Salīṭ ibn ʿAmr and his brother al-Sukrān—al-Sukrān was accompanied by his wife Sawdah bint Zamʿah; Mālik ibn Zamʿah (2) and his wife ʿAmrah bint al-Saʿdī; Abū Ḥāṭib ibn ʿAmr of the Banū ʿĀmir, along with their confederate Saʿd ibn Khawlah—who was from Yemen; Abū ʿUbaydah ʿĀmir ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Jarrāḥ al-Fihri; Suhayl ibn Bayḍāʾ—Bayḍāʾ was his mother, whose name was Daʿd bint Jaḥdam ibn Umayyah ibn Ḍarib ibn al-Ḥārith ibn Fihr; this is Suhayl ibn Wahb ibn Rabīʿah ibn Hilāl ibn Ḍabbah (3) ibn al-Ḥārith; ʿAmr ibn Abī Sarḥ ibn Rabīʿah ibn [Hilāl ibn Mālik ibn Ḍabbah ibn al-Ḥārith] (4); ʿIyāḍ ibn Zuhayr ibn Abī Shaddād ibn Rabīʿah ibn [Uhayb ibn Ḍabbah ibn al-Ḥārith] (5)—though it is also said: rather [Rabīʿah ibn] (8) Hilāl ibn Mālik ibn Ḍabbah; ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith ibn Zuhayr ibn Abī Shaddād ibn Rabīʿah; ʿUthmān ibn ʿAbd Ghanm ibn Zuhayr (6); Saʿd (7) ibn ʿAbd Qays ibn Laqīṭ and his brother al-Ḥārith, both of the Fihr clan.
Ibn Isḥāq (8) said: “The total number of Muslims who reached the land of Abyssinia and settled there—excluding their children, whether taken out while still infants or born in Abyssinia—was eighty-three men, if ʿAmmār ibn Yāsir is counted among them; on this point there is some uncertainty.”
I say: Ibn Isḥāq’s inclusion of Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī among those who migrated from Mecca to Abyssinia is exceedingly strange. Imām Aḥmad (9) reported: “Ḥasan ibn Mūsā narrated to us: I heard Ḥudayj (10), the brother of Zuhayr ibn Muʿāwiyah, relate on the authority of Abū Isḥāq …”
(1) The editors of Ibn Hisham’s Sīra changed the original genealogy from Suʿayd to Saʿd, which is incorrect, since Umayr is a descendant of Suʿayd, not of Saʿd; see Jamhara al-Ansāb by Ibn Hazm (pp. 163–64) and the corresponding entry in al-Iṣāba.
(2) In manuscripts H and T it appears as Rabiʿa—a scribal error. The reading confirmed by Ibn Hisham’s Sīra and Jamhara al-Ansāb al-ʿArab (p. 166) is correct, and its biographical notice is found in al-Iṣāba.
(3) In manuscript H and in Ibn Hisham’s Sīra it reads Hilāl ibn Aḥayb ibn Dabba. I consider this a corruption; the correct form is Hilāl ibn Mālik ibn Dabba, as in Jamhara al-Ansāb (p. 177) and in the biographies of Sahl and Suhayl ibn Bayḍāʾ in al-Iṣāba.
(4) The text in brackets in H—and in the reading adopted by T and Ibn Hisham’s Sīra (1:330)—reads “Aḥayb” instead of “Mālik.” Ibn Hisham himself noted this discrepancy.
(5) The material within brackets was omitted in both H and T; I restored it from Ibn Hisham’s Sīra, where he explains the disagreement between Mālik and Aḥayb. The text outside the brackets is taken from H.
(6) The edition T here inserts the word akhawāt (“sisters”) or akhwān (“brothers”). This addition is neither in H nor in Ibn Hisham’s Sīra; it is a later interpolation by copyists aiming to remove the confusion among the manuscripts noted above.
(7) In T it reads Saʿīd, whereas H, Ibn Hisham’s Sīra, and Jamhara al-Ansāb (p. 178) support Saʿd. There appears to be some variation: Ibn Ḥajar, in al-Iṣāba, cites it in the orthography Saʿd but attributes it to the spelling Saʿīd, and he provides its biographical entry there.
(8) For the same wording see al-Siyar wa-al-Maghāzī (p. 228), Ibn Hisham’s Sīra (1:330), and al-Rawḍ (2:75).
(9) In his Musnad (1:461).
(10) In H and T it appears as “Khadījān” with an initial khāʾ—a scribal slip. The reading confirmed by Musnad Aḥmad and al-Ikmāl (2:396) is correct.