Abstract This chapter explores the positions of two theologians who affirm no ontological difference between a nature and a suppositum (or between a human being and their humanity), but affirm a difference in connotation between these various terms. Thus, Godfrey of Fontaines, drawing on some claims made by Aquinas, claims that ‘suppositum’, and the corresponding concrete substance-sortals, connotes independence; ‘nature’, and the corresponding abstract substance-sortals, connotes possession by another. Hervaeus Natalis follows Godfrey closely. Both thinkers subject the position of Giles of Rome to extensive criticism, and the chapter includes a discussion of this, focusing on Godfrey's criticism that Giles's theory is ontologically wasteful.