Burnt offerings and harpies at Nasidienus’ dinner-party (Horace, Satires 2.8)

Horace's last Satire describes a disastrous dinner party hosted by the gourmet Nasidienus, which is ruined by a collapsing tapestry. The food served afterwards is presented in a dismembered state. This chapter argues that several elements of the scene recall the greedy Harpies of Apollonius' Argonautica, and that Horace's friend Virgil shows the influence of this Satire in his own Harpy-scene in Aeneid 3. It also argues that the confusion in the middle of the dinner causes the food cooking in the kitchen to be neglected and burned. This explains the state of the subsequent courses, which Nasidienus has salvaged from a separate disaster backstage.

Taylor v Caldwell (1863)

A Landmark Case is one which stands out from other less remarkable cases. Landmark status is generally accorded because the case marks the beginning or the end of a course of legal development. Taylor v Caldwell is regarded as a landmark case because it marks the beginning of a legal development: the introduction of the doctrine of frustration into English contract law. This chapter explores the legal and historical background to the case to ascertain if it is a genuine landmark. A closer scrutiny reveals that while the legal significance of the case is exaggerated, the historical significance of the cases reveals an unknown irony: the case is a suitable landmark to the frustration of human endeavours. While the existence of the Surrey Music Hall was brief, it brought insanity, imprisonment, bankruptcy and death to its creators.