Implicit and Explicit Words of Wisdom in Aeschylus and in Prometheus Bound: A Laconically Generalizing Titan and a Densely Lavish Poet

Abstract

Abstract Prometheus Bound is a disputed play in the Aeschylean corpus. For some time now the impact of this short description seems to be gradually unraveling the renowned reputation this play used to enjoy. What was in the past the grandiose work of an eminent master, is now regarded by a rising number of scholars as a rather simplistic composition by an anonymous author. Yet, even though the disputed play could not have been composed by Aeschylus, and is indeed nothing like Aeschylus in the summit of his art, as we know him in the main through the fully extant dramas of the last fifteen or so years of his career, Pr. is not devoid of genuine dramatic value. In the present study I focus on the generalizations in the plays in the Aeschylean corpus. I attempt to show that even though the author of Pr. and Aeschylus are clearly different in how they exploit generalizations, this does not – ipso facto – imply that the anonymous former is incompetent in this respect, while the famous latter is most skillful. They are two different playwrights with two different, yet both very special, approaches in handling generalizations.