such as al-Miqdād ibn al-Aswad, who was ascribed (1) to al-Aswad al-Zuhrī because the latter had adopted him, whereas his actual name was al-Miqdād ibn ʿAmr (2).

Or the ascription may be to one’s mother, as in the case of Ibn ʿUlayya. He is Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Miqsam, a trustworthy narrator; ʿUlayya was his mother’s name, by which he became well-known, although he disliked being called “Ibn ʿUlayya.” For this reason (3) al-Shāfiʿī (4) would say: “Ismāʿīl—who is known as Ibn ʿUlayya—related to us” (5).

[Recognizing lineages whose surface meaning is not their real intent]

Or a man might be attributed to something other than what first (6) comes to mind (7). Take al-Ḥaddhāʾ (8): at face value one would assume the name refers to his practicing or selling the cobbler’s trade, but that is not so. He merely used to sit in the company of cobblers (9), and thus the label clung to him. The same holds for Sulaymān al-Taymī (10); he was not from the Banū Taym (11), but had simply taken up residence among them (12).