CACrown ArchivesHistory · sources · collections
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Prometheus Bound

ancient Greek tragedy by Aeschylus

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 2, 2026
Entity authorityQ846870
Source-derived summary

Prometheus Bound (Ancient Greek: Προμηθεὺς Δεσμώτης, romanized: Promētheús Desmṓtēs; Latin: Prometheus Vinctus, often abbreviated PV) is an ancient Greek tragedy traditionally attributed to Aeschylus and thought to have been composed sometime between 479 BC and the terminus ante quem of 424 BC. The tragedy is based on the myth of Prometheus, a Titan who defies Zeus, and protects and gives fire to mankind, for which he is subjected to the wrath of Zeus and punished.

British-born author, C.J. Herington, a scholar of classical Greek and Latin, wrote that Aeschylus certainly did not mean Prometheus Bound to be a "self-contained dramatic unity", and suggests that "most modern students of the subject would probably agree" that Prometheus Bound was followed by a work with the title Prometheus Lyomenos (Prometheus Unbound). Herington adds that "some very slight evidence" indicates that Prometheus Unbound "may have been followed by a third play", Prometheus Pyrphoros (Prometheus the Fire-Bearer); the latter two survive only in fragments. Some scholars have proposed that these fragments all originated from Prometheus Unbound, and that there were only two Promethean plays rather than three. Since the final two dramas of the trilogy have been lost, the author's intention for the work as a whole is not known.

The ascription to Aeschylus had never been challenged since antiquity down to relatively recent times. By the 1970s, both R. P. Winnington-Ingram and Denys Page had become sceptical of its authenticity, but the majority of scholars still affirmed the traditional attribution of authorship. Independently in 1977 both Oliver Taplin and Mark Griffith made forceful cases, on linguistic, technical and stagecraft grounds, for questioning its authenticity, a view supported by M. L. West. To date, no consensus on the matter has been established, though recent computerized stylometric analysis has thrown the burden of proof on those who uphold the traditional claim.

Synopsis

Before the play begins, Cronus, the ruler of the pre-Olympian gods (the Titans), had been overthrown by an insurgency led by Zeus.

Editorial summary

“Prometheus Bound” enters the record as ancient Greek tragedy by Aeschylus. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Prometheus, Bound and ancient can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1977—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Prometheus, Bound and ancient.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Prometheus Bound” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Prometheus, Bound and ancient provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q846870. VIAF identifies the subject as 259058129. The Library of Congress control number is n81062716. None of the 7 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1977.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Prometheus Bound”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Prometheus Bound primary sources, Prometheus Bound archive and Prometheus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Prometheus Bound”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Prometheus Bound” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.