The Roman emperor Nero possessed very high standards & had discriminating taste when it came to the literature he preferred. He wanted only the best the empire had to offer him. He also ordered the death of his mother, Agrippina the Younger, & was an absolutely tyrannical despot possessed of an in my opinion rather unwholesome moral character. Nero was not the ideal Roman emperor, though his mother Agrippina the Younger did try her hardest to set him on the right path.The reign of Nero spanned from the year 54-68 A.D. It is known today as the Neronian Era, & considered a colorful period in the fields of art & literature, particularly in satire & tragedy.Gaius Petronius & Lucius Seneca were two of the most renowned specialists in their respective fields, & they were totally different men with very dissimilar backgrounds. They also couldn't stand each other, from what exists of valid extant historical data. They would probably scream bloody murder if they could see that there was a book published in modern times which combined their work into a single volume.'The Satyricon' & 'The Apocolocyntosis of the Divine Claudius' are widely believed to have been authored by Petronius & Seneca, respectively, but we are not 100% sure of that. 'The Apolcolocyntosis' is definitely of the 'Neronian Era', & 'The Satyricon' has been narrowed to a specific timeframe of possible dates. The translation work for the Penguin Edition was done by J.P. Sullivan, whom also wrote the immensely helpful introductions which accompany both of these works. There is also very copious & thorough background information taking the form of additional notes throughout the texts. Neither of these works are complete, however 'The Satyricon' contains many more 'lacunae' (lacunae is Latin for missing portions of the original text) than does 'The Apolcolocyntosis' which is almost intact.Gaius Petronius was an offensive, uncouth reprobate; a profligate with an appetite for extravagance & keen aesthetic taste. He had style to complement his wit, which was razor-sharp. He was also very quick on his feet linguistically, making him a dangerous man to cross within the lunatic court held by Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus.Seneca was an educated aristocrat with an established reputation bolstered by legitimate credentials. He was born in Hispania (modern Spain) with schooling in literature & philosophy, he served as Nero's advisor & tutor because Nero's mother Agrippina the Younger had a very high opinion of him, & he was very qualified for what he practiced. He had credentials, education & aristocratic background which added esteem & lent impetus to his rhetoric as well as any counsel he offered to those soliciting it. This in turn would increase their reputations. Nothing looks better for a nobleman or woman than when they heed the counsel of a shrewd political advisor & make a crucial decision predicated upon that advice. When you took a man like Seneca into your confidence, every decision was the right one. Seneca's prose was accompanied by strong didactic undertones, which probably contributed to his popularity eventually garnering the ire of two emperors, Gaius Caligula & his successor Claudius whom exiled & recalled him numerous times, (Caligula only exiled him) before his permanent reinstatement at the behest of Agrippina the Younger as the tutor of her son Nero & later as an advisor.While Seneca was learned, renowned, & generally regarded as a credible authority in the subjects of rhetoric & literature, Gaius Petronius Arbiter had absolutely no qualifications or credentials of any sort, whatsoever. I would equate Petronius' specific areas of expertise to be in the fields of shooting his mouth off with flagrant abandon & being a reckless, vainglorious spendthrift with no regard for consequences or repercussions of any kind. Tacitus describes him in 'The Annals' as being "no ordinary profligate" but "an accomplished voluptuary". But Petronius, in spite of his numerous deficiencies of character from what survives of him in extant writings, was a very stylish guy. He was considered an authority, if not necessarily a 'legitimate' one, in the fields of taste & luxury, probably enraging his rivals to the point of insanity. The opinion of this smart-mouthed aristocrat was apparently held in such esteem that he was given the title of 'arbiter elegantiarum' by the emperor Nero, meaning 'arbiter of elegance'. I can only imagine the warm reception at court that Petronius 'enjoyed' when he became an officially recognized, legitimate pain-in-the-ass instead of merely an informal one. There are very few actual details on Petronius' life, but he must have been at the very least a minor aristocrat whose conduct & habits were so flagrantly offensive they actually became desirable attributes, at least for him.'The Satyricon' reads with a relaxed degree of humor & sarcasm which I don't believe was intended to delve too deeply into its subject matter; it's written with a fair amount of seriocomic social commentary (seriocomic means combining serious & humorous into the same thing; in this instance it would be serious in intention but jocular in manner) also seasoned with humorous cultural references which probably would've gone over my head had I not read the expanded notes in the text provided by J.P. Sullivan. The notes help immensely with learning about the nature of the expressions or euphemisms that the characters in 'The Satyricon' use when they speak or narrate. Characters like 'Trimalchio' & 'Eumolpus' at times engage in behavior so ludicrous that you can't help but laugh out loud at their escapades. The fragmented nature of the text is unfortunate, Sullivan's often-informative & sometimes-humorous notes make the experience more enjoyable. There are numerous characters appearing in 'The Satyricon' so the translator has also included a glossary with a character list & descriptions for every character appearing in the text. Immensely helpful. Reading 'The Satyricon' is a pleasantly brisk experience, kind of like being at a party with a bunch of people, & instead of spending the entire time talking to the same three or four, you spend time moving around, chatting with different people for a short while before moving on & proceeding to the next.'The Apocolocyntosis of the Divine Claudius' which is believed to have been written by Seneca, reads quite differently. For one, it's a lot shorter. It's also very scathing, from a critical perspective in regards to the "potency" of the sarcasm which permeates the literature. The bottom line is as follows : Nero was a very spiteful emperor, & he wished to portray Claudius as a politically-incompetent, inept administrator; in layman's terms, a buffoon of the highest caliber. Seneca had been exiled by Claudius, so he already hated him without Nero telling him to do so, so IF Seneca wrote this, which we aren't even sure of, he most assuredly did it in an effort to garner favor with Nero. The plotline of this farce centers around a comical accounting of Claudius' journey to the afterlife following his death where he is depicted as an utter incompetent of such magnitude, it practically defies description. He petitions heaven (or whatever the Romans equated with heaven) for entry & deification, only to have another, almost equally-ludicrous portrayal of a deified-Augustus give voice to an objection that reads like it was concocted by a 5-year old child throwing a temper tantrum. It's seriously freaking hilarious, this is really what satire should be like, in my opinion. It's clever, witty, & intelligent, the way it's written bespeaks of a sharp mind & a keen intellect that's very aware of which attributes to blow out of proportion for specific people within in the narrative. After being denied entry to the afterlife & refused deification, Claudius then proceeds to hell, where he is put on trial & subjected to further humiliation, before being placed under the supervision of his nephew, Caligula, & made to work as a law clerk, which is where 'The Apocolocyntosis' ends. Even the word, 'Apocolocyntosis' is a play on words intended to ridicule Claudius; 'apotheosis' is the Latin term for 'when a person is deified', 'apocolocyntosis' means something along the lines of 'when a person is turned into a pumpkin'.'The Satyricon' & 'The Apocolocyntosis of the Divine Claudius' is a fantastic way to discover how brilliant our ancestors in the Roman empire really were with the comedy they created, especially as pertains to the arts of satire, ridicule, & witty social commentary that they infused with a simple love for their own culture. I am not an expert on Latin-to-English translation work, but given the fact that I enjoyed reading both of these short novels I think Sullivan was probably well-above average in his field. The introduction to 'The Satyricon' & its companion piece are both extremely interesting as well as being informative to the reader. I would most emphatically recommend you read it if you enjoy anything about Roman history, satire, the late Julio-Claudian Era, or maybe if you want to try something new. It's a very worthwhile expenditure of your time.