The paper offers an afresh analysis of the issue concerning the name of the author of the Noctes Atticae, that has been long debated since the Humanistic Age. The author is usually known as Aulus Gellius, based on the assumption that the reading Agellius, which occurs frequently in both the direct and the indirect tradition, is a mere scribal slip for A. Gellius. The new inquiry focuses at first on the incipit and explicit indications in the direct witnesses of the Noctes Atticae, demonstrating that here Agellius is the archetypal reading and A. Gellius occurs only as a rare and secondary correction. The rest of the paper is devoted to the systematic survey of the indirect sources, subdivided in those attesting the names Agellius, Aulus Gellius, and Gellius. This analysis, supported by an afresh direct in- spection of the manuscripts of each source, shows that Agellius is the name cited by the majority of the indirect witnesses (Lactantius, Augustine, Priscian, Gregory of Tours); that the loci believed to attest Gellius seem to be actually occurrences of either Agellius (Historia Augusta) or of a totally different name (Naucellius in Fronto). Aulus Gellius occurs only once in Servius’ commentary on Virgil and twice in Servius auctus.