The culture hero is a figure in myth who brings to humanity the things that make culture possible, fire, agriculture, tools, language, law, ritual, medicine, by discovery, invention, gift or theft. It is one of the standard analytic types in the comparative study of myth.
Prometheus is the type-case in the Western canon: he steals fire from the gods and gives it to human beings and is punished perpetually for it, the punishment being a recurring feature of the theft variant. Others include Maui across Polynesia, who snares the sun to slow it and fishes islands out of the sea; Coyote in much of western North America and Raven in the Northwest, who bring light, fire and salmon and are simultaneously tricksters and fools; Quetzalcoatl, credited with maize and the calendar; Osiris, credited in Egyptian tradition with agriculture and law; Cadmus with the alphabet in Greece; and in Chinese tradition a cluster of culture-bringing sages, Fuxi with hunting, fishing and the trigrams, Shennong with agriculture and medicine, Cangjie with writing.
Two observations recur in the scholarship. The first is that the culture hero and the trickster overlap heavily, and in many traditions are simply the same figure. This is not a confusion in the traditions but a feature of them: the qualities that make a trickster, appetite, cunning, indifference to boundaries and to whose property something is, are precisely what is required to take something from those who have it and give it to those who do not.
The second is that the acquisition is frequently transgressive and frequently punished. Fire is stolen rather than given in a great many versions worldwide, and the ambivalence this expresses, that what makes us human was taken without permission, and that we are living on the proceeds, is among the more suggestive things comparative mythology has identified.
The category has its critics. Like the other typologies inherited from the classificatory era in the study of myth, it can flatten figures whose significance within their own traditions is far wider than the single function the label names, and it can impose a developmental framing in which "culture" is a checklist of acquisitions rather than a way of living. Used descriptively rather than explanatorily it remains a useful way of noticing that traditions everywhere feel obliged to account for where the fundamentals came from, and that they rarely say the fundamentals were simply given.