(1) Manuscript T reads “istawʿaytu.” (2) See Huda al-Sari, section seven, “Clarification of the frequently shared neglected names,” p. 222. (3) The word “bihi” (with it) is absent from W. (4) Manuscript Z vocalizes “al-marwiyyu” (the narrated) with the nominative ending; the adopted reading follows H. (5) J, Y, and L read “al-rawi ʿanhu” (the transmitter from whom) instead of “al-shaykh al-marwi ʿanhu” (the shaykh from whom the report is transmitted), and a marginal note in L supports the adopted text. Al-Manawi writes: “I examined the copy belonging to al-Kamal Ibn Abi Sharif—the one he read to the author and on which the author usually certified each folio—and I found the wording: ‘fa-bi-khtisāsihi’ (i.e., the shaykh from whom the report is transmitted). Al-Kamal then struck out the phrase ‘al-shaykh al-marwi ʿanhu’, wrote in the margin in his own hand ‘i.e., the transmitter’, and corrected it accordingly” (al-Yawaqit wa-l-Durr, 2/269–270). Al-Manawi’s description, however, is imprecise; the reading I have adopted is the more convincing one. (6) In the margin of A—in the author’s handwriting—appears: “thumma balagha kadhalik” (then it likewise reached [us]). (7) The word “fihi” (in it) is missing from D. (8) H and W read “wa-l-nazar” (and critical examination); Y has “aw al-zann” (or conjecture); a marginal copy on W records “wa-l-zann” (and conjecture). (9) Manuscript T reads “lil-ghalib” (for the prevailing case). Al-Dhahabi outlines several criteria on the matter; see Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalaʾ, 7/464–466.