In this talk, we consider the weakness of universal epistemic modals such as English must, Greek prepi, and Italian dovere (jointly referred to as MUST).  It will be proposed that the criterion for weakness is nonveridicality, which imposes a non-homogenous epistemic space for MUST. We show that that nonveridicality is superior to indirectness, since in indirect knowledge contexts MUST is prohibited. Because MUST quantifies over a nonveridical modal base, epistemic MUST p does not entail that the speaker knows that p is true. MUST is thus contrasted with KNOW and BELIEVE which are veridical — and, like all modals, is an indicator that the speaker does not know or believe p. As a consequence of this analysis, no special evidential component for MUST needs to be posited. The alleged evidentiality is derived by the inferential nature of MUST imposed by nonveridicality.