Leyla Ozbek
Scuola Normale Superiore, Faculty of Humanities, Department Member
- University of Pisa, Department of Civilizations and Forms of Knowledge, AdjunctUniversity of Cambridge, Classics, Department MemberUniversity of Florence, Department of Literature and Philosophy (DILEF), Adjunctadd
- My research interest are, among others, Greek tragedy and fragments, Greek epic, Greek literature of the Imperial per... moreMy research interest are, among others, Greek tragedy and fragments, Greek epic, Greek literature of the Imperial period, cultural and literary contacts between Greek and Latin traditions, women studies, digital humanities, papyrology, and the study of ancient manuscripts transmission.edit
Research Interests: Greek Literature, Greek Tragedy, Papyrology, Fragmentary dramas, Ancient Greek tragedy, Narratology and ancient drama, Reperformances of ancient drama, and 5 moreAncient Greek Tragedy, Ancient Greek Tragedy Performance History, Greek Literary Papyrology, Tragic fragments, and Fragmentary Ancient Greek Tragedy
Research Interests:
From the experience of the SNS Theatre Group, new original Italian translations of Sophocles' tragedies, specifically thought for the stage. In the first volume, Electra and Philoctetes. Dall'esperienza del Gruppo Teatrale della... more
From the experience of the SNS Theatre Group, new original Italian translations of Sophocles' tragedies, specifically thought for the stage. In the first volume, Electra and Philoctetes.
Dall'esperienza del Gruppo Teatrale della Normale, nuove traduzioni italiane originali delle tragedie di Sofocle, specificamente pensate per la messa in scena. Nel primo volume, Elettra e Filottete.
Dall'esperienza del Gruppo Teatrale della Normale, nuove traduzioni italiane originali delle tragedie di Sofocle, specificamente pensate per la messa in scena. Nel primo volume, Elettra e Filottete.
Research Interests:
This paper reconstructs the history of the hypothesis, first put forward by Gottfried Hermann in a study about Aeschylus’ Niobe, that Sophocles’ Niobe was a satyr drama. This opinion, supported only by a minority of scholars already in... more
This paper reconstructs the history of the hypothesis, first put forward by Gottfried Hermann in a study about Aeschylus’ Niobe, that Sophocles’ Niobe was a satyr drama. This opinion, supported only by a minority of scholars already in Hermann’s time, has been later definitively dispelled by papyrus discoveries of fragments and testimonia of the play. Nevertheless, reviewing this error of judgement bearing in mind the evidence available to scholars of the past is extremely interesting from a methodological point of view. Research on Sophocles’ Niobe shows a series of misunderstandings and errors (surviving partly to the present day) due above all to an approach that was not based on the play as a whole, but on the analysis of individual fragments or even single terms. The assessment of the specific case of Sophocles’ Niobe allows us to shed light on the conventions of satyr drama and on the method of attributing fragments to this theatrical genre. The re-examination of this ‘satyric thesis’ is very instructive not only from the point of view of the rules and methodology concerning fragmentary satyr dramas, but also from a more general point of view, for the history of classical studies as a whole.
This study examines three fragmentary tragedies, Sophocles’ Eurypylus, Aeschylus’ Niobe, and Euripides’ Ino, focusing on the characterisation of the female protagonists. They are mothers who lose their offspring, either because of... more
This study examines three fragmentary tragedies, Sophocles’ Eurypylus, Aeschylus’ Niobe, and Euripides’ Ino, focusing on the characterisation of the female protagonists. They are mothers who lose their offspring, either because of circumstances not linked to them, or because they happen to kill (with varying levels of actual responsibility) their own children. Within the plot, they are closely intertwined with another member of their family: a male relative (brother, husband, father, etc.), who partially shares in the action taking place, and in the attention of the audience. At different levels, these characters share with the mother her feelings, grief, and sometimes even guilt for the death of the child or children.
By showing their actions and inner connection with their female relative, the dramatists aim to enhance the portrayal of the motivations, grief and, in some cases, the justifications of the protagonist of these plays: the mother.
The aim of this study is to show how these male characters play the role of sounding boards for the female protagonists’ guilt and sorrow: they magnify the characterisations of the mothers, and, above all, their grieving solitude.
By showing their actions and inner connection with their female relative, the dramatists aim to enhance the portrayal of the motivations, grief and, in some cases, the justifications of the protagonist of these plays: the mother.
The aim of this study is to show how these male characters play the role of sounding boards for the female protagonists’ guilt and sorrow: they magnify the characterisations of the mothers, and, above all, their grieving solitude.
Research Interests:
This article examines the polysemy of the work σκῆπτρον in Sophocles' OT (and OC): σκῆπτρον is both the weapon with which Oedipus killed Laius, and the token of monarchy that Oedipus has obtained through the murder itself. Oedipus’... more
This article examines the polysemy of the work σκῆπτρον in Sophocles' OT (and OC): σκῆπτρον is both the weapon with which Oedipus killed Laius, and the token of monarchy that Oedipus has obtained through the murder itself. Oedipus’ ambiguous situation in Thebes – lawful heir and kingslayer – becomes evident through σκῆπτρον and its twofold meaning.
The audience, however, have already heard Tiresias’ prophecy, and thus know that the σκῆπτρον will also be the staff that Oedipus will use once blind. By means of its polysemy, then, the same word is associated with the three crucial moments of Oedipus’ life as it is laid out throughout the play: the past, with the killing of Laius; the present, with his position of king; the future, with the atonement for his crimes. Although recurring only twice in the drama, σκῆπτρον is set at the crossroads of Oedipus’ life, and has therefore a remarkable significance for the whole meaning of the play. What is more, Sophocles seems to bear this association in mind when actually staging the ‘sequel’ of Oedipus Rex, Oedipus Coloneus. By playing again on the different meanings of σκῆπτρον (both the blind man’s walking-stick and his former sceptre), the poet revives the ambiguity he had already created in Oedipus Rex, and confirms the associations of the term with each stage of Oedipus’ life.
The audience, however, have already heard Tiresias’ prophecy, and thus know that the σκῆπτρον will also be the staff that Oedipus will use once blind. By means of its polysemy, then, the same word is associated with the three crucial moments of Oedipus’ life as it is laid out throughout the play: the past, with the killing of Laius; the present, with his position of king; the future, with the atonement for his crimes. Although recurring only twice in the drama, σκῆπτρον is set at the crossroads of Oedipus’ life, and has therefore a remarkable significance for the whole meaning of the play. What is more, Sophocles seems to bear this association in mind when actually staging the ‘sequel’ of Oedipus Rex, Oedipus Coloneus. By playing again on the different meanings of σκῆπτρον (both the blind man’s walking-stick and his former sceptre), the poet revives the ambiguity he had already created in Oedipus Rex, and confirms the associations of the term with each stage of Oedipus’ life.
Research Interests:
For an epic poet like Quintus, who writes his Posthomerica in Greek at the beginning of the third century CE , narrating the events which concern Aeneas during the war at Troy means dealing not only with a complex character, but also with... more
For an epic poet like Quintus, who writes his Posthomerica in Greek at the beginning of the third century CE , narrating the events which concern Aeneas during the war at Troy means dealing not only with a complex character, but also with the founder of the Roman Empire, and with Rome itself. The matter becomes even more complicated for a poet who, in his ‘reenactment’ of Homer’s poetry, claims to come from Smyrna, one of the putative fatherlands of Homer, and, during Quintus’ period, one of the centres of the Hellenophone part of the Empire. In such a period, depicting a character like Aeneas means a continuous and nuanced reshaping of some unavoidable topics, which will involve the story and its contextualisation. This is in part a literary project, but also – most importantly – a cultural process of «construct[ing] Greek identity in relationship to the Greek past and the Roman present» .
This article will deal with the literary and cultural-historical aspects of the depiction of Aeneas, aiming to demonstrate how Quintus deals with these patterns against the background of the cultural negotiation between Greek identity and the Roman Empire.
This article will deal with the literary and cultural-historical aspects of the depiction of Aeneas, aiming to demonstrate how Quintus deals with these patterns against the background of the cultural negotiation between Greek identity and the Roman Empire.
Soph. El. 1245-50, a passage from the recognition duet between Electra and Orestes, has so far steered clear of the editors’ criticism. However, the passage presents a number of small and yet troublesome problems: there is a lacuna; the... more
Soph. El. 1245-50, a passage from the recognition duet between Electra and Orestes, has so far steered clear of the editors’ criticism. However, the passage presents a number of small and yet troublesome problems: there is a lacuna; the participle λησόμενον is syntactically obscure; the meaning of the verb ἐνέβαλες is not perspicuous; the position of the phrase οἷον ἔφυ is strange. Our paper investigates all the problems mentioned above, trying to reassess the grammatical, syntactical, and linguistic status of the passage, and to find a solution to its main difficulties.
in G.W. Most, L. Ozbek (eds.), Staging Ajax’s Suicide, Pisa 2015, pp. 261-272
in A. Santoni, F. Guidetti (eds.), Antiche Stelle a Bisanzio. Il codice Vaticano greco 1087, Pisa 2013, pp. 69-76
in G. Bastianini, F. Maltomini, G. Messeri (eds.), Papiri della Società Italiana, volume sedicesimo (PSI XVI), pp. 29-30
“Philologus” 155 (2011), pp. 292-306
Authors: M. Cardin and L. Ozbek; “Studi e Testi per il Corpus dei Papiri Filosofici” 16 (2011), pp. 137-162
“Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche” 19 (2008), pp. 599-622
in M. Baumbach, S. Bär (eds.), Quintus Smyrnaeus: Transforming Homer in Second Sophistic Epic, Berlin - New York 2007, pp. 159-183
“ZPE” 158 (2006), pp. 29-42
“Comunicazioni dell’Istituto Papirologico «G. Vitelli»” 6 (2005), pp. 3-9
Anzeiger für die Altertumswissenschaft 73/3 (2020)
JHS 136, 2016 (PAGE 1 of 2)
RFIC 145 (2017)
“Lexis” 33 (2015), pp. 549-556.
in G. Katsiampoura (ed.), Scientific Cosmopolitanism and Local Cultures: Religions, Ideologies, Societies. Proceedings of 5th International Conference of the European Society for the History of Science (Athens, National Hellenic Research... more
in G. Katsiampoura (ed.), Scientific Cosmopolitanism and Local Cultures: Religions, Ideologies, Societies. Proceedings of 5th International Conference of the European Society for the History of Science (Athens, National Hellenic Research Foundation/Institute of Historical Research, 1-3 November 2012), Athens 2014, p. 707 (http://5eshs.hpdst.gr/sites/5eshs.hpdst.gr/files/5eshs-proceedings.pdf)
Second International Conference "The Forgotten Theatre. Mythology, Dramaturgy and Tradition of Greco-Roman Fragmentary Drama" (University of Turin, 28th-30th Nov. 2018). * Registration required Registration is free but compulsory. Please... more
Second International Conference "The Forgotten Theatre. Mythology, Dramaturgy and Tradition of Greco-Roman Fragmentary Drama" (University of Turin, 28th-30th Nov. 2018).
*
Registration required
Registration is free but compulsory. Please complete the form on www.teatroclassico.unito.it (deadline 25th Nov. 2018).
*
Download the PROGRAMME here: http://www.teatroclassico.unito.it/it/content/annuale-convegno-internazionale-«-forgotten-theatre»
More information: teatro.classico@unito.it
*
Registration required
Registration is free but compulsory. Please complete the form on www.teatroclassico.unito.it (deadline 25th Nov. 2018).
*
Download the PROGRAMME here: http://www.teatroclassico.unito.it/it/content/annuale-convegno-internazionale-«-forgotten-theatre»
More information: teatro.classico@unito.it