I'm not sure I follow you. Are you asking for the first person to read it in that manner, as Prometheus bringing reason to Man? Because, honestly, I don't know who the absolute first person to give it that treatment was, but it's not a new reading, to be sure. The part I posted above was from Thoreau's translation, which I've always been partial to. Here's the bit the PH posted above, in Thoreau's version.
Think not indeed through weakness or through pride
That I am silent; for with the consciousness I gnaw my heart,
Seeing myself thus basely used.
And yet to these new gods their shares
Who else than I wholly distributed?
But of these things I am silent; for I should tell you
What you know; the sufferings of mortals too
You've heard, how I made intelligent
And possessed of sense them ignorant before.
But I will speak, not bearing any grudge to men,
But showing in what I gave the good intention;
At first, indeed, seeing they saw in vain,
And hearing heard not; but like the forms
Of dreams, for that long time, rashly confounded
All, nor brick-woven dwellings
Knew they, placed in the sun, nor wood-work;
But digging down they dwelt, like puny
Ants, in sunless nooks of caves.
And there was nought to them, neither of winter sign,
Nor of flower-giving spring, nor fruitful
Summer, that was sure; but without knowledge
Did they all, till I taught them the risings
Of the stars, and goings down, hard to determine.
And numbers, chief of inventions,
I found out for them, and the assemblages of letters,
And memory, Muse-mother, doer of all things,
And first I joined in pairs wild animals
Obedient to the yoke; and that they might be
Alternate workers with the bodies of men
In the severest toils, harnessed the rein-loving horses
To the car, the ornament of over- wealthy luxury.
And none else than I invented the sea-wandering
Flaxen-winged vehicles of sailors.
Such inventions I wretched having found out
For men, myself have not the ingenuity by which
From the now present ill I may escape.
I don't either, but if you ever find out, please let me know.
It's not a new reading, but it ain't that old. My guess is that it could be neo-platonic, if not a typical 18th or 19th century reading (Kant, or Hegel).