Classics and the Western Canon discussion

Our Interim Readings are usually very short, so short that we normally open the discussion at the same time as the announcement of the reading. This one is a bit longer though, so I am announcing it now to give people a week or so to read it before the discussion starts.

We'll return to the Greeks for this one. Prometheus Bound is an unusual and powerful play, and I hope it will inspire a spirited discussion.

There are a number of good translations, the standard being David Grene's Greek Tragedies, Volume 1 but there are many others, including the relatively recent and more literally translated version in the Loeb Classics Library by Alan Sommerstein.

There are a few public domain translations as well, some easier to read than others. Ian Johnston's translation is available here:

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfil...

The discussion will open on March 18.

I haven't taken part in this group for some time. But, I have this book. so maybe I will join the discussion

I read this last year--I will definitely listen in to the conversation. I may even re-read

toria (vikz writes) wrote: "I haven't taken part in this group for some time. But, I have this book. so maybe I will join the discussion"

Please do! Always good to hear voices that renew connections....

Here is the link to the Tufts University's Perseus English translation:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/t...

Aeschylus. Aeschylus, with an English translation by Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. in two volumes. 1. Prometheus Bound. Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. 1926.

I read it a couple years ago and really loved it. Would be nice to experience it again now that I'm more familiar with the Canons.

I’m excited to be reading this and just got a copy of the David Greene translation.

Okay! Let's go.

There are various sources for the myth of Prometheus, but in all of them Prometheus is a trickster god with a soft spot for mortals. Hesiod describes the "five ages of man," each of which either self-destructs or is destroyed by Zeus. In Aeschylus' version, Zeus is about to destroy the race of mortals again, but Prometheus intervenes and saves them. In other myths Prometheus is punished because he tricks Zeus into taking the less desirable part of a sacrifice while the better part goes to the "race of men". Zeus is a tyrant who does not suffer defiance lightly, and Prometheus is a wily rebel. Do you find Prometheus to be more like a human than a god? Why does Prometheus unwisely rebel against the power of Zeus?

Power, a servant of Zeus, has the first say in this play. He and Violence, another servant (who is mute,) have taken Prometheus to the ends of the earth where he will be confined by Haephestus to an outcropping in the Caucasus.

Haephestus says that Prometheus "gave honor to mortals beyond what was just" but he pities him. Power asks Haephestus "Why are you pitying in vain? ... Why is it that you do not hate him, since it was your honor that he betrayed to men?" This appears to be a world of gods versus men, one in which men are neither respectable nor honorable and certainly not worthy of divine gifts. Prometheus rebels against this idea, pities the human race, tricks the King of the gods, and accepts his punishment for it. Why?

This is also an odd play dramatically. Does it work dramatically?

Many of us probably feel like Prometheus chained to the rock at the moment. Keep calm, stay well, and maybe we can find some catharsis in this ancient work of art.

Thomas wrote: "This is also an odd play dramatically. Does it work dramatically?..."

It seems to me to be more like a fragment of expository writing than a play. There isn’t a proper beginning, middle, or end. There’s no rising action, no conclusion. We enter the play after the climax has taken place and then it stops. It consists of Prometheus interacting with other characters, explaining why he did what he did, and depicting Zeus as a tyrant who deserves to be castigated.

I enjoyed it. I think it will be interesting to discuss the issues it raises about courage, compassion, tyranny, and rebellion. I’m just not sure it’s a play.

It made me think of the original setting for Aeschylus's works--a public religious festival including recitation of long narrative poems in honor of the gods, not yet quite fully developed into drama.

Yet what a poem in honor of the gods! One god gets hauled out and chained to a rock, where he talks to a series of visitors about how Zeus is cruel upstart tyrant, doomed to be superseded. Then curtain.

Thomas wrote: "This is also an odd play dramatically. Does it work dramatically? ..."

I suspect it would work better as radio drama — too much dialogue and not a lot of actions!

Thomas wrote: “ Many of us probably feel like Prometheus chained to the rock at the moment. ”

Given how Prometheus embodies forethought ... I feel like our situation is better described as the aftermath of Prometheus-bound — forethought itself is turned into sentient Foie gras and in chain, so the world is left to cope in perpetual presence, with no will to learn from the past, or prepare for the future.

Thomas wrote: “ Do you find Prometheus to be more like a human than a god? ”

Well... no, I don’t , I don’t see it at all. Humans are by definition mortal to the Greeks, Prometheus, unlike Io, lacks the option of suicide. He can only suffer for as long as Zeus wills him to, he cannot choose to end it by not-being (dying).

Also, Prometheus, forethought itself, holds some kind of trump (!) card: he knows absolutely and for sure that Zeus will be threatened in the future, and will want to befriend him again. So however horrible his suffering is, he knows it’s only for the time being, and not eternal, and he has absolute certainty that he will be vindicated ultimately. Whereas Io blindly accepts Prometheus’ false prediction (hope) to lift her spirit, which no doubt helps her endure her sufferings.

So again, no, I myself don’t think he seems particularly human, though I want to hear your thoughts on this.

Thomas wrote: “ Why does Prometheus unwisely rebel against the power of Zeus? ”

Is it unwise though? Who is going to get his last laugh? Imagine being a tyrant without forethought, what could possibly go wrong?

Being a science nerd, I was struck by the relationship between Power and Force as agents of Zeus. Violence in my edition was named Force.

In Physics, Power is defined as the amount of energy consumed per unit of time. Another way to put this is: the rate at which “work” is done. Work occurs when there is force causing movement of an object. For example, a person pressing against a brick wall is consuming energy, but no work is being done and no power created because the wall does not move. But if a person pushes on a table and moves it, then there is work. Power expresses how quickly that work is done. So, force is one element of the power equation, along with other basic elements like distance and time.

In that light, it makes sense that Force is silent, and Power is doing all the talking and pushing the others around making sure the work of nailing Prometheus to the rock gets done asap. Prometheus is not simply chained to the rock, he is nailed through the chest to it.

There seems something particularly cruel about inflicting never ending pain and suffering on an immortal being that cannot die. And therein lies a tie to human mortality. It seems the involvement of gods always entails some sort of punishment often everlasting. For example a lake of fire appears in both ancient Egyptian and Christian religion, as well as in Plato's Gorgias as a place of after-death punishment of the wicked.

I downloaded, I think, three translations.

My experience with this in the past has been that it left me cold.

As Lia pointsout, there is not a lot of humanity here.

And not a lot of drama, as others have said.

As I recall, this is known to be one play in a trilogy, but it is not certain whether it is first or second- presumably not last.

A dissenting voice here.

I find Prometheus to be more human than godlike.

Greek gods are notorious for being selfish, self-serving, indifferent to the pain and suffering they cause humans, rape at will, kill at will, pit humans against each other for sport, etc. etc.

Prometheus, on the other hand, shows compassion for humans. He calls them "sad, wretched human beings." He educates them on their natural surroundings, teaches them to read and write, relieves them from carrying heavy burdens by showing them how to yoke animals, etc. etc. These are all selfless acts. He has nothing to gain by doing this. He gives them fire knowing full well he will suffer the consequences of his actions.

I don't see any similarity with the Greek gods in any of this.

Tamara wrote: "Greek gods are notorious for being selfish, self-serving, indifferent to the pain and suffering they cause humans..."

That’s a really good point.

Also, whereas humans have no chance of appealing against the injustice of Zeus, that’s precisely what Prometheus is doing here: arguing that Zeus is in the wrong, his treatments of others unjust. And he’s choosing to suffer for justice. We know from Homer’s epics that Zeus eventually changed his way and adopted a more just way of relating to humans. We can even discern difference of Zeus’ violence and care between the Iliad and the Odyssey. By the beginning of TO, Zeus is himself concerned with defending, justifying his way.

So I changed my mind ... half way, he’s both inhuman on the surface, and a very important bridge between the Gods and humans.

I agree with Lia, that Prometheus embodies both god-like "properties" such as immortality and seeing the future, yet manifest compassion for those less fortunate (mortals) that we attribute to being human.

I also agree that the play doesn't seem to have any beginning or real conclusion. Maybe it is because people for whom it would have been staged for knew the full story already?

Why does Prometheus continue to rail against Zeus despite the exhortations of his various visitors to find ways to ease his punishment? He willfully defied Zeus & seems to want to continue to anger him? Is he enduring suffering for the sake of mankind? A martyr of sorts. Or is he being self-destructive? The play ends before the real torture begins. Cruel & unusual punishment indeed.

Chris wrote: "I also agree that the play doesn't seem to have any beginning or real conclusion. Maybe it is because people for whom it would have been staged for knew the full story already?.."

The Greek audience was already familiar with the story of Oedipus, Antigone, Medea, etc. etc. And yet those plays had a beginning, a middle, and an end.

Chris wrote: "Why does Prometheus continue to rail against Zeus despite..."

Presumably because

And yet

I can’t accept my lot—

neither in silence, nor in speech:

There is his dilemma: To speak is to chafe against Necessity, which can only add to his pain, but to be silent is implicitly to acquiesce in an “outrage”

Character is fate, his character is such that he cannot acquiesce, so he’s fated to suffer (unlike Hephaestus the perpetual, consistent acquiescer.)


Now that I think about it, this is also how [some] puny mortals react to tyranny.

Chris wrote: "I also agree that the play doesn't seem to have any beginning or real conclusion. Maybe it is because people for whom it would have been staged for knew the full story already?..."

This is from the introduction of my copy (NYRB)

How could the pious author of Agamemnon or The Suppliant Maidens have portrayed the King of kings as an unjust and ruthless despot? This objection was met with the argument that the play was but the first (or, some thought, the second) movement in a trilogy, and that the whole work described an evolutionary arc that would culminate in the release of a chastened Prometheus by a matured and compassionate Zeus. Such a story line, enriched and complicated, of course, by a wealth of dramatic development, could indeed be constructed out of the surviving fragments of two other plays—Prometheus Unbound and Prometheus the Firebringer—that were traditionally ascribed to Aeschylus.

So, like Christopher (Donut) suggested, some academics argue this might be part of a trilogy.

The notes in the Ian Johnston Translation, link provided in message 1, do suggest this was the first of three plays:

Prometheus Bound was apparently the first play in a trilogy (the other two plays, now lost except for some fragments, were Prometheus Unbound and Prometheus the Fire-Bringer).

Additionally we also have a more complete tale of Prometheus, as contemporary audiences would have, in the general mythology, including the spoilers of who eventually sets him free, and what the secret demise of Zeus is all about.

But turning back to this work there are a few concepts expressed, some of which remind me of dialog in Plato's Republic:

1. Hephaestus says that Power lacks a sense of pity and is full of cruel self-confidence.

2. Power asserts that only the ruler is truly free, which echos Thrasymachus' arguments in the Republic.

3. We also have the ideas stated in Plato's Republic that power:

is a sickness
which somehow comes with every tyranny
to place no trust in friends.

How free is the tyrant that cannot trust his friends?

Tyrant, as every schoolboy knows, was a technical term in Greece, for a "new king," a monarch who had not inherited his throne.

One might call Zeus tyrant in this sense w/o imputing despotism, although it is probably inevitable that a "new king" would fear overthrow.

Christopher wrote: "Tyrant, as every schoolboy knows, was a technical term in Greece, for a "new king," a monarch who had not inherited his throne.

One might call Zeus tyrant in this sense w/o imputing despotism, alt..."

Good thing I'm not a schoolboy then ;-)

I do know tyrant wasn't a generic pejorative term, but, even our old friend, Xenophon, tiptoed around the problems with tyranny. It's not an occupation suitable for those without forethoughts.

David wrote: "There seems something particularly cruel about inflicting never ending pain and suffering on an immortal being that cannot die. And therein lies a tie to human mortality. It seems the involvement of gods always entails some sort of punishment often everlasting. For example a lake of fire appears in both ancient Egyptian and Christian religion, as well as in Plato's Gorgias as a place of after-death punishment of the wicked. "

Hmm -- my stream of consciousness on this almost Spring day, where the daffodils are blooming in my front yard, and Neil Degrasse Tyson, in Natural Geographic's viewing of the so-called new "Cosmos" on Monday, spoke of the seeming insistent persistence of life in the universe, takes me more to the concepts of resurrection than to Dante's fiery Cocytus pool.

I've never fully understood Prometheus. Hero to the humans, but what good is his foresight doing anyway? I don't really like thinking of Prometheus as "humanized," but there are some things that make me feel more pity for him. For instance, there is an emphasis on friendship that surrounds him. Poor Hephaestus doesn't want to chain him at all! Also, Prometheus is a better councilor to himself than to others. And I can relate to that!

David wrote: "How free is the tyrant that cannot trust his friends?"

Hear, hear! And a lovely surmise.

Ashley wrote: "I've never fully understood Prometheus. Hero to the humans, but what good is his foresight doing anyway? I don't really like thinking of Prometheus as "humanized," but there are some things that ma..."


Why pity if he chose defiance? Like a typical protester, he’s asking the world to “look what Zeus is doing to me!” To call Zeus’ abuse of power into question, he first needs to make the world see. He reminds me so much of Odysseus, his power is his cunning, his metis, his strategic planning, and his ability to endure... like Odysseus in Cyclopes’ cave.

I wonder if it could be a kind of didactic metaphor: let power and violence (or force) run amok with forethought in chain and suppressed, what could go wrong? It could also be an affirmation of worthy suffering in order to change Zeus’ relationship with other deities and with humans. (Reminds me of Odysseus suffering a great deal but seen as more worthy than Menelaus’ cushy life with Helen.). We know that Athens was a lone democracy constantly defining itself against other regimes, maybe a play like this helps affirm their identity as a people? I don’t know, I’m speculating.

It might not be arbitrary fondness for humans either, we know some tales depict Prometheus as the creator of human, taking a personal interest in the survival of humans in a hostile world makes sense if Aeschylus’s audience were also aware of that:

The story that Prometheus creates mankind from mud or clay must have been known in Athens, perhaps as early as the fifth century BC. A fable attributed to Aesop that may date as early as the classical period says that ‘The clay which Prometheus used when he fashioned man was not mixed with water but with tears’ (Fable 516, trans. Gibbs 2002). This reference suggests that a version of Prometheus as creator was already in circulation at this time. And yet while the creation aspect of Prometheus may have been known, it is interesting that it did not form the basis of a major literary or artistic work in the archaic or classical Greek world. The story is only briefly mentioned by the comic poets Menander and Philemon in the fourth century BC. Prometheus, creator of mankind, does appear on Etruscan or Italic gems from the third and second centuries BC, however, and the theme is taken up with enthusiasm by the Roman poets of the Augustan period. Ovid opens his Metamorphoses with an account of the creation of the earth, including Prometheus fashioning man from water and earth

source: Prometheus

Lia wrote: "Given how Prometheus embodies forethought ... I feel like our situation is better described as the aftermath of Prometheus-bound — forethought itself is turned into sentient Foie gras...
."

Lucian says in one of his satirical pieces that the Athenian general Cleon was "a Prometheus after the event... " I expect this charge would apply to a great many politicians in history who were unprepared to deal with a crisis.

Chris wrote: "Why does Prometheus continue to rail against Zeus despite the exhortations of his various visitors to find ways to ease his punishment? ."

Great question. Now that he has been caught and imprisoned, his only strength is the capacity to suffer and outlast his punishment. Maybe "kicking against the pricks" and giving voice to his pain is soothing somehow. I wonder if Aeschylus might be calling his audience to identify with and imitate Prometheus in this respect, to find an expression for their pain through theater.

To make wail and lament for one's ill fortune, when one will win a tear from the audience, is well worthwhile. l. 638

Thomas wrote: "Chris wrote: "Why does Prometheus continue to rail against Zeus despite the exhortations of his various visitors to find ways to ease his punishment? ."

Prometheus claims here to be a victim of fate and acknoledges there is no use protesting his fate. Even the gods could not go against fate. I recall Zeus wishing to save a certain person at Troy could not because he was fated to die. On the other hand, Prometheus cannot help protesting against the injustice of his punishment in these events.

I must endure,
as best I can, the fate I have been given,
for I know well that no one can prevail
against the strength of harsh Necessity.
And yet it is not possible for me
to speak or not to speak about my fate.

The twin reactions of futile complaining about an absurd situation of suffering while at the same time enduring it also makes Prometheus more human-like. A kind of existential and sisyphean attitude of acceptance without resignation.

My question now is why is, Necessity, capitalized here and is there a difference between Necessity and fate?

David wrote: "My question now is why is, Necessity, capitalized here and is there a difference between Necessity and fate? ."

It isn't clear if Aeschylus is referring to the goddess Necessity or the concept. Grene does not capitalize it, so I presume he takes it to be the concept. In mythology Necessity (Ananke) is the mother of the Fates (Moirai). Both deities are personified concepts, and obviously the concepts are related, but not exactly the same.

The last two lines you quoted caught my eye though. Why is it not possible for him to speak about his fate? He expands a little later in the lines Lia quoted in part @ 19:

CHORUS
But what has destiny foretold for Zeus,
except to rule eternally?

PROMETHEUS
That point
you must not know quite yet. Do not pursue it. [520]

CHORUS
It is some holy secret you conceal.

PROMETHEUS
Think of something else. It is not yet time
to talk of this. The matter must remain
completely hidden, for if I can keep
the secret safe, then I shall be released
from torment and lose these shameful fetters.

Why is this secret knowledge? What would happen if Prometheus let it out? If it's fated... what could change it?

Ashley wrote: "I've never fully understood Prometheus. Hero to the humans, but what good is his foresight doing anyway? I don't really like thinking of Prometheus as "humanized," but there are some things that ma..."

Don't we feel for Prometheus because he's sacrificing himself for the good of mankind? It's hard not to see a parallel with Jesus here, at least on that specific point, and it's hard not to feel the "passion", the suffering of Prometheus, as something very human.

And I agree, his foresight does not seem to do him much good. If he knows what's going to happen, why can't he avoid this profound punishment? Again I hear a parallel from Christian scripture: "He saved others, let Him save Himself if he is the Christ of God."

Thomas wrote: "Why is this secret knowledge? What would happen if Prometheus let it out? If it's fated... what could change it? ..."

Prometheus could, Zeus could. For Zeus to change his fate of being overthrown, he needs... forethought, foreknowledge, stratagem.

If Prometheus gives that knowledge away now, Zeus wouldn’t need his help to avoid his fate.

Zeus can (and does) avoid that fate, since Aeschylus’ audience knows he wasn’t overthrown. I surmise, Zeus suppressing his desire to rescue his favorite heroes in the Iliad was part of the price he had to pay to avoid his evil fate, Achilles was born to die precisely because Zeus learned about Thetis’ son’s power. To make it up to Thetis, he had to nod, had to assent to compensate and give Achilles what he demanded. But to think that so many heroes and Demigods died in Troy because of Zeus’ plan, that’s ... elaborate forethought alright.

But then that means Prometheus offered false hope to Io. It’s part of his plan for Zeus to avoid his evil fate by reconciling with Prometheus again. It might be necessary for Io to have false hope to endure the sufferings Zeus is causing her... so what Prometheus gives humans (hope, fire) aren’t pure goodies ... it’s a bit like Zeus’ jars of good and evil.

In my translation, the word Necessity is all ways capitalized. For a play that has a lot about fate is Aeschylus implying a link between necessity and fate?

Also, I find it interesting that the last line said by Prometheus (and the last line of the play) is “you see me, how unjust things I suffer”. Since Aeschylus is linking Prometheus early in the play with bringing about of human civilization, is this maybe a commentary about the human condition? Or am I just reading too much into the text?

This was my first read of the play and I found it enjoyable and very modern, which might have to do with the translation (James Scully and C. John Herrington).

Mike wrote: "Since Aeschylus is linking Prometheus early in the play with bringing about of human civilization, is this maybe a commentary about the human condition? Or am I just reading too much into the text?..."

I think you are right. This is barely mentioned in Aeschylus’ drama, but that seems to be one of the main themes in Hesiod’s poem: Prometheus gives men the tools to struggle against hostile nature, but at the same time men are punished for Prometheus’ transgression against Zeus. Part of that punishment is back-breaking toils and an end to the cushy Golden Age life where acorns fall onto your plates (the other punishment is... women!) Men are gifted with means to survive challenging environments, but the environment is also made more challenging because of that theft (and the sacrificial goodies prank.)

Again I’m reminded of how similar this is to the Odyssey: Odysseus could have lived a cushy life with Calypso, but he chose cunning struggles, tricks, toils, risks, failures, losses, and ultimately - mortality.

Maybe ancient epics and dramas and poems help people cope with the toils and unpredictable nature and political strifes and wars, and give them false but necessary hope, and help them think that such complicated life is choice-worthy?

Also, Prometheus was worshipped together with Athena and Hephaestus in ancient Athens:

Athena, Hephaestus, and Prometheus are brought together in Athens through cult as well as myth. All three gods are celebrated with festivals that include torch races, and Hephaestus and Prometheus are said to share an altar in the precinct of Athena in the Academy. Originally a sacred grove and perhaps most famous as the site of Plato’s philosophical school...

The main precinct of the Academy belonged to Athena. An ancient commentator to Sophocles’ tragedy Oedipus at Colonus tells us that in the Academy there was an old building with an altar where Prometheus, Hephaestus, and Athena were all worshipped in common. Near the entrance to this building was a pedestal on which Prometheus and Hephaestus were represented in bas-relief. Prometheus is portrayed there as an old man with a sceptre in his right hand while Hephaestus is shown as a youth in the secondary position. The altar captures the important relationship between these two fire gods, establishing Prometheus as the first and more senior of the two.

source: Prometheus

Thomas wrote: "Why is this secret knowledge? What would happen if Prometheus let it out? If it's fated... what could change it?"

A Technicality? Maybe we need a Mythologist Apologist to explain all of this? Perhaps this is where Prometheus' forethought comes into play. Zeus was not fated to be overthrown until he married the wrong person resulting in the third generation of paternal god usurping offspring. Prometheus with his powers of forethought knew these details. So it seems you could avoid your fate, if you had enough forethought to avoid that fateful first step.

I think the point in the play of all of this is to underscores the injustice of Zeus' punishment of Prometheus despite the fact Prometheus aided the Olympian's rise to power against his fellow Titans, and will keep him in power by advising Zeus on future actions to avoid being overthrown. Punishment by pinning another god to a rock, or forcing a daughter valkyrie to sleep on a fiery mountain seems the standard pay scale by which ruling gods show their appreciation.

Thomas wrote: "Ashley wrote: "I've never fully understood Prometheus. Hero to the humans, but what good is his foresight doing anyway? I don't really like thinking of Prometheus as "humanized," but there are some..."

My translation (Grene) strikingly refers several times to Prometheus being "nailed" to the rock.

I never realized before now that Prometheus was such a renaissance man and took his gift of fire only at face value.

In short: all the artistic skills men have come from Prometheus

In more detail:
Architecture, astronomy, math, writing, animal husbandry and domestication, shipbuilding and sailing, mining and metallurgy, medicine, forecasting/divination, psychology: and was the first to organize their dreams, ornithology: The flights of birds with crooked talons I classified for them, Haruspicy: reading bird entrails, cooking or sacrifice?: I roasted thigh bones wrapped in fat and massive cuts of meat. . .

It also seems Prometheus taught humans observation and intellect: they noticed things, but did not really see and listened, too, but did not really hear. They spent their lives confusing everything, like random shapes in dreams.

Fire represents quite a bit more than just a source of heat and light I previously thought.

My question now is, why or how did the humans acquiring all of these skills prevent Zeus from wiping them out? Zeus could wipe out a colony of skilled artisans just as easily as he could wipe out a bunch of cave men, right?

@21David wrote: "How free is the tyrant that cannot trust his friends?..."

It sometimes seems to me that "trust" is some sort of ultimate gift that humans sometimes extend to each other, whether "friend" or "enemy." It seems always to come with some element of risk, whether small or great.

(That comment is biased by just having listened to an AARP town hall conference call on increased telephone fraud relative to IRS dealings this time of year -- with a little insert on fake calls to grandparents relative to adult grandchildren arrested in some far city while on semester break. It "feels good" to feel able to trust the information presented; but what are the questions unanswered? Replace that scenario with "friendly" info from "trusted" sources on whatever subject one wants to choose? Or swap "friendly" and "trusted" in the previous question. )

I am attempting to see this play through the eyes of Athenian contemporaries, rather than those of a twenty-first century playgoer.

First, the play is deliberately incomplete. It was the first part of a trilogy. There are existing fragments of the other parts. The second part was Prometheus Unbound, and the third was Prometheus Pyrphoros ("Prometheus Fire-Carrier"). There can be no doubt that Prometheus Unbound was the first play in the trilogy. It is preserved in the Medicean manuscript which contains the texts of Aeschylus' surviving seven plays as well as a Greek commentary that was composed in the classical period by someone who was acquainted with much now-lost Greek literature, including the two other plays of the Prometheia. In the commentary on Prometheus Bound, it is stated:"In the following play he is released." Another comment, on Prometheus' statement that he must struggle through ten thousand years, states " many years; for in the Pyrphoros (Aeschylus) says that (Prometheus) has been bound for thrice ten thousand years," which would appear to make it clear that this play follows Prometheus Unbound. So Prometheus Unbound is setting the groundwork for the action which is to follow and seems incomplete since it is only the first movement in a three movement superdrama.

Second, the play appears to be static from the necessity that the protagonist is literally nailed to the stage, meaning a succession of other characters must be brought to appear in his presence. However, I don't think Aeschylus' audience would have had that impression. Keep in mind this is Aeschylus, not Euripides (and certainly not Shakespeare) and the audience would not have expected much action onstage. However, this play actually has more onstage action than Agamemnon. In Agamemnon, the dramatic action occurs offstage and is described onstage. Moreover, when the action occurs it would not have come as a shock, since it had already been described by Cassandra. Aeschylus' audience would have expected the play's action to be conveyed more in the poetry than in physical activity, and Aeschylus went out of his way to do so, although, unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to convey this in a translation. There were three types of delivery in the Athenian theater, each associated with its characteristic meter or meters. The playwright had at his disposal: (1) Speech, a six-foot iambic line used in dialogue. (2) A delivery known as parakatalogē (sometimes called chant, something midway between speech and song, accompanied instrumentally. This is characteristically associated with a quick-moving anapestic meter and usually indicates rising emotions. A good example is this play's finale. (3) Song, instrumentally accompanied and associated with an endless variety of lyric meters. There can be little doubt that the contemporary audience would have taken fascination in following the use of these three deliveries. Unfortunately, to the modern, following this is a little like following the libretto of an opera without the music. Prometheus' opening utterance has been regarded by classicists as one of the very greatest passages of Greek poetry and it is the the only extant example in all the Greek drama of a speech which uses all three modes of delivery. It is impossible to appreciate the play without understanding what Aeschylus has done here. The speech opens with a clear, majestic appeal to the elements in unaccompanied speech. Then he slips into a chant in which he laments his horrible suffering. Then, abruptly, he reverts to speech asserting that he can foresee the future and must endure it. Then he bursts into song (probably inspired by hearing the music of the approaching Chorus). Then he reverts to chant again, first proudly defying the gods and then slipping into panic: "I'm afraid whatever comes."

Aeschylus uses this opening speech to set the tone and introduce the themes of the entire trilogy. And, once again to try to see this through the eyes of his contemporaries, it must have come as something of a shock to see the story of Prometheus presented seriously as tragedy. Prometheus has a rather insignificant semi-comic role in Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days and the whole point of the story seems to be that you can't trick Zeus and get away with it. Also, he is not depicted as a benefactor of mankind, in fact, the result of his action is that men are cursed by the appearance of the first female: Pandora. In fact, from the fragmentary evidence available, it appears that the Prometheus story was usually handled in a comic manner. There was a lost comedy by Aeschylus' contemporary Epicharmus titled Prometheus or Pyrrha, and there is a very funny comic episode involving Prometheus in Aristophanes' Birds. Even Plato's creation myth in Protagoras treats Prometheus with a lack of respect. Aeschylus himself presented a satyr play in 472 called Prometheus Pyrkaeus ("Fire-Lighter"). There is a surviving fragment of this play: a song sung by the satyr-chorus depicting a wild dance around the new fire, which also contains an appeal for some nymphs to come join the fun. The point is that the view of Prometheus as a tragic hero which we derive from Shelley, Goethe and Karl Marx was by no means that of the Greeks.

By the way, another note on this opening scene: it was a convention in the drama of Aeschylus' time that there could be only three speaking characters on stage at any one time. This is why Violence is mute The audience would have known that the character had to be mute. Also, Prometheus in this scene is one of the famous "Aeschylean mutes", these are speaking characters that are brought onto the stage but which remain silent for a long stretch. Cassandra in Agamemnon is a good example. Probably the best example is Pylades in Libation Bearers who remains silent throughout the entire play until the single line he finally speaks urging Orestes to kill his mother. Just reading the play, it is impossible to appreciate the effect these characters must have had. When reading one often forgets that they are physically present, but the audience had them always before their eyes, and their very silence made them more impressive. It is also impossible, just from reading, to appreciate the cumulative effect of Prometheus' physical presence before the eyes of the audience throughout the entire play.

The question has been asked if Prometheus has human attributes. In my opinion, the answer is a definite no. There is nothing human about Prometheus; he is unmistakably a god. He shares with the gods the most defining attribute of godhead: immortality. In addition, he is a lot more like Zeus than might appear at first. Yes, he suffers, and is at times absorbed in complaining about the suffering he is experiencing at the current moment, much like a human being (such as Io), but he also has the gift of limitless foresight and can foresee his ultimate vindication, much like a prophetic god. He seems to alternate between attitudes. He is a bitter adversary of the tyranny of Zeus, but also says he played a role in defeating the titans and "helped (Zeus) set up his tyranny." These words probably sounded especially sinister to the contemporary Athenians because they echo the exact words in the ancient Greek law cited by Aristotle in The Constitution of Athens directed against anyone who helped to set up a tyranny in their city. He is also contradictory towards Io, promising at times to tell her the truth, at other times refusing to do so and at other times revealing the truth in oracular obscurity. In fact, I think a careful reading of the play shows that the very characteristics Prometheus attributes to Zeus, such as stubbornness, anger, rashness and harshness, are also attributed to Prometheus (notably by the Chorus). Also, Prometheus gives us a glimpse of a kindly Zeus, doing his best to ease Io's sufferings, at the end of the Io scene. If I am right, then the play is not a simplistic opposition of right versus wrong. Both sides share some of the same attributes and neither side is blameless. In fact, the play seems to depict a nightmare universe in which all is uncertain (somewhat like that depicted in Agamemnon except, I think, even more so). Is Prometheus a sufferer or a divine seer, a champion of humanity or a discontented member of the divine totalitarian party? Is Zeus a pitiless dictator or the beneficent father of the universe? Is Io a mad heifer girl or the mother of heroes?

There is no positive date for the production of Prometheus Bound, but most scholars believe it was written during the last two years of Aeschylus' life (456/5). If that is the case, he had been thinking about the Prometheus story for 14 years since his earlier satyr play, and had undoubtedly come to see it differently. If the date of composition is correct, it follows Suppliant Maidens and the Oresteia and would appear to represent a growth of the concept expressed in those plays of a rift between the gods, of two divine ideas of right that come into conflict with one another. In the Oresteia, the two opposing viewpoints are ultimately reconciled, and the Eumenides are transformed into a positive force. Something similar must have taken place in the Prometheia. The existing fragments of the other two plays show that Prometheus' prophecy comes true: Prometheus was released in the end by Herakles, the descendant of Io. Furthermore, a friendship between Prometheus and Zeus is brought about, and it appears Prometheus' shackles are converted to garlands. Athenaeus in his Deipnosophistae of about 200 AD writes: "Aeschylus in the Prometheus Unbound expressly says that it is in honor of Prometheus that we put the garland about our heads, as a recompense for his chains." In another passage from the same discussion Athenaeus quotes a story from the historian Menodotos, concerning a penalty laid upon some ancient inhabitants of the island of Samos: "Apollo through his oracle told them to pay that penalty which in times gone by Zeus laid upon Prometheus for his theft of fire. For after Zeus released him from his most cruel chains, Prometheus consented to pay a voluntary but painless requital; and this is what the Leader of the Gods ordained that he should have. Whence it was that the garland was revealed to Prometheus, and not long afterwards it was inherited by mankind also, whom he had benefited by the gift of fire." Hyginus, a Latin mythological writer who drew heavily on Greek sources, especially tragedy, and probably lived in the second century AD, in his Astronomy of the Poets, writes: "Several people have said that he (Prometheus) wore a garland in order that he could say that he had been the victor, since he had sinned without being punished for it; and for that reason mankind began the custom of wearing garlands in moments of their greatest joy, and in victories."

Thomas wrote: "...his foresight does not seem to do him much good. If he knows what's going to happen, why can't he avoid this profound punishment? Again I hear a parallel from Christian scripture: "He saved others, let Him save Himself if he is the Christ of God."

There is no "avoiding" this fate. It is necessary (Necessary?), maybe, as Lia mentioned, to change Zeus' relationship with other deities as well as humans. Prometheus is hardly the avoiding type.

Lia wrote: "Why pity if he chose defiance? Like a typical protester, he’s asking the world to “look what Zeus is doing to me!” To call Zeus’ abuse of power into question, he first needs to make the world see. He reminds me so much of Odysseus, his power is his cunning, his metis, his strategic planning, and his ability to endure... like Odysseus in Cyclopes’ cave."

I felt uneasy saying I feel "pity" for Prometheus. I look up to the guy. I feel empathy, compassion, sorrow for his pain-filled future.

I've been struggling with the idea of this as a performance... but it does seem like there are separate scenes (Hephaestus, Oceanids, Io). Does anyone notice a plot or character arc? Am I doomed to uncertainty with the rest of the trilogy missing? The other two sound SO cool!

Donnally wrote: "Whence it was that the garland was revealed to Prometheus, and not long afterwards it was inherited by mankind "

Great Post Donnally. It really puts things in an appropriate perspective. There must be a video out there somewhere that captures that, even if we are not conditioned to respond the same way to the different deliveries. Please explain how Cassandra telling the audience fits in and why should the audience believe her? The only Cassandra in Mythology I am aware of is Hecuba and Priam's daughter from Troy.

I will only add this about the garlands.

Having once, however, condemned him to everlasting punishment, Zeus stipulated that, in order still to appear a prisoner, he must wear a ring made from his chains and set with Caucasian stone—and this was the first ring ever to contain a setting. But Prometheus’s sufferings were destined to last until some immortal should voluntarily go to Tartarus in his stead; so Heracles reminded Zeus of Cheiron, who was longing to resign the gift of immortality ever since he had suffered his incurable wound. Thus no further impediment remained, and Heracles, invoking Hunter Apollo, shot the griffon-vulture through the heart and set Prometheus free. Mankind now began to wear rings in Prometheus’s honour, and also wreaths; because when released, Prometheus was ordered to crown himself with a willow wreath

Graves, Robert. The Greek Myths (Penguin Classics Deluxe Edition) (pp. 510-511). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Graves cites these sources:
Servius on Virgil’s Eclogues vi. 42; Hyginus: loc. cit.; Pliny: Natural History xxxiii. 4 and xxxvii. 1; Aeschylus: Prometheus Bound 1025 and Prometheus Unbound, Fragment 195, quoted by Plutarch: On Love 14; Apollodorus: loc. cit. Athenaeus: xv. 11–13; Aeschylus: Fragments 202 and 235, quoted by Athenaeus p. 674d; Apollodorus: loc. cit.

Ashley wrote: "I felt uneasy saying I feel "pity" for Prometheus. I look up to the guy. I feel empathy, compassion, sorrow for his pain-filled future."

This is the Greek, or at least the Aristotelian meaning of pity. For Aristotle, "pity" is aroused when the audience identifies with a character who suffers some kind of injustice, an undeserved fate. I think Aeschylus succeeds in this (though Aristotle would certainly say the play does not succeed as a whole) because we can identify with Prometheus on a human level as someone who first, suffers like a human, and secondly, sacrifices himself for love.

I think it does not matter that he is a god -- he suffers like a human. If this is a story about power, what does it mean that Prometheus, a god, sacrifices himself for a fragile and impoverished humanity? Aren't the gods supposed to wield power and recieve the sacrifices of humans? Is this a reversal of sorts? Or is Prometheus just a really differend kind of god?

Lia wrote: So, like Christopher (Donut) suggested, some academics argue this might be part of a trilogy.

Yes, my copy's introduction also argued for a trilogy. I try to read the story/play/poem first before reading any explanations or critiques.

Christopher wrote: "Tyrant, as every schoolboy knows, was a technical term in Greece, for a "new king," a monarch who had not inherited his throne.

One might call Zeus tyrant in this sense w/o imputing despotism, although it is probably inevitable that a "new king" would fear overthrow.
Especially since he had just overthrown his father!

Mike wrote: "In my translation, the word Necessity is all ways capitalized. For a play that has a lot about fate is Aeschylus implying a link between necessity and fate?

My translation has a note about Necessity: Greek Adrasteia , , literally "the Inescapable," one of the names of Nemesis, the personification of divine retribution.

Ashley wrote: "I felt uneasy saying I feel "pity" for Prometheus. I look up to the guy. I feel empathy, compassion, sorrow for his pain-filled future."

Thomas wrote: "This is the Greek, or at least the Aristotelian meaning of pity. For Aristotle, "pity" is aroused when the audience identifies with a character who suffers some kind of injustice, an undeserved fate. I think Aeschylus succeeds in this (though Aristotle would certainly say the play does not succeed as a whole) because we can identify with Prometheus on a human level as someone who first, suffers like a human, and secondly, sacrifices himself for love.

I think it does not matter that he is a god -- he suffers like a human. If this is a story about power, what does it mean that Prometheus, a god, sacrifices himself for a fragile and impoverished humanity? Aren't the gods supposed to wield power and recieve the sacrifices of humans? Is this a reversal of sorts? Or is Prometheus just a really differend kind of god?"

Hmm, I smell a verbal trickster here. Tom’s got a good point, the Greek idea of pity isn’t like ours, but I read Ashley as discussing the modern sense of pity, because we are moderns! And surely, everybody born after Nietzsche is a little bit suspicious of that particular state of mind in the modern sense.

That aside, that’s still really great insight. The Okeanids’ U-turn from counseling prudence to committing to suffer with Prometheus is exactly how pathos is supposed to work: it moves complacent people into committed (but risky, painful, dangerous) actions. Maybe this sets the play to move with the Okeanids from static verbal waffling to praxis. Maybe the missing plays are full of actions.

Chris wrote: "Especially since he had just overthrown his father!..."


Well, yes, good point, but didn't his father also overthrow his own father? (His name suggests he was also a bit of an a-hole. I suspect it runs in the family.)

Maybe Zeus needs to have better relationships with forethought itself in order to innovate and break out of that eternal patricidal cycle.