IN THE ESNA-IDFU REGION, NILE VALLEY, EGYPT 25 



arbitrarily used by various authors to represent the Paleocene, but were differently 

 interpreted and much confused. 



Loeblich & Tappan (1957a, b) divided the Paleocene into a lower and an upper 

 stage which they equated with the Danian and Landenian respectively. They 

 (1957a) suggested the inclusion of the Thanetian as the lower substage of the Landen- 

 ian and the Sparnacian as the upper one, although they mentioned (1957&) that the 

 Sparnacian may represent both late Paloecene and early Eocene time. These 

 authors recorded the occurrence of G. daubjergensis Bronnimann and G. triloculi- 

 noides Plummer in the lower part of the type Montian (the " Tuffeau de Ciply "), 

 and thus considered the type Montian as the lateral equivalent of the type Danian, 

 and stated " The occurrence of the Cerithium fauna in the type Danian, and the 

 Nautilus danicus in Montian equivalents, the species of the daubjergensis-compressa 

 faunal zone represented in both type Danian and type Montian and their equivalents 

 over the world, the identical stratigraphic position of the Danian and Montian, each 

 unconformable on the Cretaceous, and underlying the Landenian sediments, and the 

 fact that they are never found together, leads inescapably to the conclusion that the 

 Danian and Montian are merely different lithologic and faunal facies of identical 

 geologic age. We suggest that the term Danian be used to include the Montian 

 also, inasmuch as the type Danian includes beds of both facies. The Danian should 

 be used as a stage name within the Paleocene ". 



Loeblich & Tappan's proposition was previously mentioned by de Grossouvre 

 (1897) and Harder (1922), and is followed by a number of authors, in spite of the fact 

 that Vincent (1928), Ravn (1933), Chavan (1946), Marie (i95o),Hofker (1961a, 1962a), 

 Moskvin & Naidin (i960) and Voigt (i960) have strongly emphasized the fact that 

 the type Montian is younger than the type Danian. 



Hofker (1961a) recorded the occurrence of Globorotalia pseudomenardii Bolli, 

 Globorotalia ehrenbergi Bolli and Globorotalia pusilla laevigata Bolli in the lower part 

 of the type Montian (the " Tuffeau de Ciply "), and thus correlated the Montian with 

 the Globorotalia pusilla pusilla and the Globorotalia pseudomenardii Zones of Bolli 

 (1957&). On these grounds, he considered the Montian to be of Middle Paleocene 

 age and introduced what he described as the Lower Paleocene between the Danian 

 and the Montian, correlating it with the Seelandian of Brotzen (1948), and stating 

 that " Alors, il n'y a plus de doute : le Montien-type, vers sa base, est deja du 

 Paleocene moyen et il est impossible de paralleliser le Montien avec le Danien ; 

 il y a un etage entier entre le Danien et le Montien, represents par le Tuffeau glau- 

 conieux, qui, deja est du Paleocene, comparable aux couches plus basses du ' Lizard 

 Springs formation du Trinidad ' ". Moreover, he added that the benthonic Fora- 

 minifera of the " Calcaire grassier de Mons ", which forms the upper part of the type 

 Montian, leaves no doubt about its Upper Paleocene age, although the planktonic 

 Foraminifera are very rare and do not form a typical association. He further 

 complicated the problem by considering the Montian as the upper part of the Lower 

 Paleocene and the G. trinidadensis-G. uncinata Zones of Bolli as representing the 

 lower part of this Lower Paleocene, which overlies the Danian. Again, he stated that 



