 The marriage that Capreolus makes implicitly and that Cajetan makes explicitly between the third mode of analogy in Aquinas’s commentary on the Sentences and analogy of proportionality in Aquinas’s De Veritate plays a key role in their approach to defending analogy against Scotist objections, and it is one of several points on which modern scholarship has taken Cajetan in particular to task as an interpreter of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. Cajetan is frequently criticised in modern scholarship for his claim that analogy of proportionality is the only mode of analogy that is analogy in the strict sense (proprie) and the other modes of analogy are only analogy in a looser sense (abusive). This claim is not original to Cajetan, and can be found in the writings of the late thirteenth to early fourteenth century Thomist, Thomas Sutton. Cajetan’s contemporary Thomist critics, such as Francis Sylvester of Ferrara and Sylvester Mazzolini Prierias dispute Cajetan’s interpretation of analogy of proper proportionality and its relationship to other modes of analogy. Francis Sylvester goes so far as to propose that analogy of proportionality is a subdivision of a subdivision of analogy of attribution. Tavuzzi has called attention to several other ways that Cajetan’s contemporary Thomists divided up the modes of analogy in opposition to Cajetan’s threefold division.  