Theobald follows Pope's arrangement, but reads 'spirit' for 'sport' in the second line, an emendation which he first suggested in a letter to Warburton, still unpublished, in the British Museum. Warburton's conjecture 'coat,' which he made no allusion to in his own edition, is mentioned by Theobald in the same letter. Hanmer gives the whole passage thus: 'Why, this is the world's soul; Of the same piece is every flatterer's spirit: Who can call him his friend that dips with him In the same dish? for even in my knowing, _Timon_ has been to this Lord as a father, And kept his credit with his bounteous purse.' Johnson follows the Folios except that he gives the first lines thus: 'Why, this is the world's soul; And just of the same piece is every flatterer's spirit: Who can call him his friend, That &c.' Steevens, in the edition of 1773, followed Johnson's arrangement, but adopted in the first lines a transposition proposed by Upton: 'Why, this is the world's sport; And just of the same piece is every flatterer's soul.' In his edition of 1793 he read as follows: 'Why this Is the world's soul; and just of the same piece Is every flatterer's spirit. Who can call him His friend, &c.' Following, in the rest, Capell's arrangement. Malone arranged as follows: 'Why this is the world's soul, and just of the same piece Is every flatterer's spirit. Who can call him his friend, That dips in the same dish? for in my knowing Timon has been this lord's father, and kept His credit with his purse.' In a note, however, he says, 'I do not believe this speech was intended by the authour for verse.' NOTE X. III. 3. 8. Hanmer made here one of his audacious alterations: 'How? deny'd him? Have Lucius and Ventidius and Lucullus Deny'd him all? and does he send to me? It shews &c.' Capell emulated him thus: 'How! have they deny'd him? Has Lucius, and Ventidius, and Lucullus, Deny'd him, say you? and does he send to me? Three? hum! It shews &c.' NOTE XI. III. 3. 19. Hanmer altered the passage thus: 'That I'll requite it last? so it may prove An argument of laughter to the rest, And amongst Lords I shall be thought a fool.' Capell follows Hanmer, except that he replaces 'no' in the first line. Steevens (1793) follows Capell in the first two lines, reading in the third: 'And I amongst the Lords be thought a fool.' Mr. Staunton suggests that the passage once stood: 'So I may prove An argument of laughter to the rest, And amongst lords be thought a fool.' Mr. Dyce, in his second edition proposes the following arrangement: 'That I'll requite it last? No: so it may prove An argument of laughter to the rest, And amongst lords I be thought a fool.' NOTE XII. III. 5. 14-18. The first Folio, followed substantially by the rest, has: