At present there are no studies specificaiiy devoted to Late Egyptian literature comparable to studies on Middle Kingdom literature (Parkinson 2002). As a result definitions of New Kingdom literature implicitly draw on and are guided by aesthetic-izing criteria used to define Middle Kingdom literature (Baines 2003b: 8; Burkard and Thissen 2008: 1). The fundamental criteria are, therefore, the same: form (Burkard 1996; Mathieu 1997) and/or fictionality (Baines 1999c; Moers 2001). From a practical perspective, however, it is clear what belongs to the New Kingdom literary corpus. A decisive element in classification is the possibly overrated Egyptological concept of genre (Baines 2003b: 11-12), and the investigation of New Kingdom literature proceeds mostly using the genres employed for Middle Kingdom literature: teachings, discourses, and tales (Parkinson 2002). Teachings and tales are stiU to be found in the New Kingdom, while discourses have apparently disappeared (Fischer-Elfert 2003: 122). However, it seems that the New Kingdom way of incorporating problematic issues into teachings and tales made discourses redundant. On the other hand, new textual types (Miscellanies, Love Songs) emerge, which can easily be classified because of their historical uniqueness and their content. Ultimately, the material of the transmission media is regarded as a marker of literary merit: papyri and ostraca are considered literary media in contrast to monumental inscriptions, which are currently excluded from the canon (Burkard and Thissen 2008: 3), despite documented cases of media cross-overs (Spalinger 2002). Given such criteria, a comparatively narrow functional definition has arisen of what constitutes New Kingdom literature as well as Egyptian literature in general: ‘‘Literature is belles lettres"' (Baines 2003b: 4). Broader definitions might well extend the corpus, as is done by Lichtheim (1976) and Simpson (2003).
Borderline cases are the Miscellanies used in Ramesside scribal education, which are sometimes excluded from the literary corpus (Quirke 1996: 382-3; but see Burkard
And Thissen 2008: 156-7). Although they can easily be described as a genre, these texts are evidently not classical enough to an eye trained on Middle Kingdom literature, and moreover, given their obvious function as educational tools, it is difficult to treat them as aesthetically pleasing texts. Those Middle Kingdom literary texts which were reutilized in the Ramesside scribal education are also considered borderline, even if these classics add considerably to the complexity of the New Kingdom literary system (Baines 2003b: 13-17).
World History
