Mundus istum M. Enius in the manuscripts of Att. 15.26.5 is surely corrupt, as has been unanimously acknowledged . Also the modern Vulgate Mundus iste cum M. Ennio, introduced by Wesenberg in his Teubner text, is an improbable guess. Shackleton Bailey has recently proposed Maenius or Menius as the gentile name of Mundus. Mennius, however, is a very rare name and does not occur in Republican documents, while Maenius, although attested in Republican inscriptions, diverges unnecessarily from the manuscript tradition. Moreover, (...) Shackleton Bailey must forcibly change istum to iste . But it is possible to avoid practically any infringement of the transmitted text if we simply read Mundus Istummenius. The name istumenius, istimenius , written in a wide variety of ways, does occur some 20 times in urban inscriptions, mostly of the early Imperial period. It is attested also outside Rome: at Velitrae , and even as far away as Gallia . This gens must therefore have been somehow present among the Roman population of the Julio-Claudian age. In particular, attention should be paid to an Instumennius on a tessera nummularia of 60 B.C. . No major figures occur in this gens, the name remaining restricted to the lower strata of the Roman population. That suits Mundus down to the ground. He clearly belongs to the grey mob of Rome. If he is, as it seems, identical with that Mundus mentioned in 15.29.1, then Cicero gives his family name in the first instance. The transmitted form with -mm- could represent a transposition of the double consonant of the common form Istumennius. (shrink)