This idiom describes someone who is extremely angry, frustrated, or agitated, to the point of being nearly uncontrollable, as if they need to be restrained or 'tied' to calm down. It conveys intense emotional turmoil, often sparked by a specific provocation, and is used in personal, professional, or social contexts to highlight a volatile state. The phrase carries a dramatic, slightly hyperbolic tone, emphasizing the severity of the anger while evoking a vivid image of someone so furious they might require physical restraint. It reflects cultural associations of rage with loss of control and the need for intervention to restore calm.

The phrase likely originated in early 20th-century America, rooted in the imagery of restraining someone who is emotionally or physically out of control, possibly tied to mental health practices or colloquial expressions for anger. An early use appears in a 1901 *Chicago Tribune* article, describing a character ‘fit to be tied’ after a betrayal. The idiom gained traction in the 1920s, reflecting the era’s fascination with vivid slang, as seen in Sinclair Lewis’ *Main Street* (1920), where it describes a character’s fury. Its use grew in American English during the mid-20th century, particularly in Southern and rural dialects, and spread to British English through media and literature. The phrase’s dramatic imagery and relevance to intense emotions ensured its enduring popularity, especially in contexts of conflict or indignation.