Dr. Nagy I. Zoltán szerk.: Fragmenta Mineralogica Et Palaentologica 3. 1972. (Budapest, 1972)

Recently El Naggar (1966) suggested the replacement of the"Sharawna Shale" to the "Dakhla Shale" and the "Oweina Shale" to the upper Esna Shale. 2. Age of the Esna Shale The age of the Esna Shale was a subject of controversy between different authors. Thus while BARRON and HUME (1902) placed them at the base of the lower Eocene or Suessonian, BEADNELL (1905) regarded them as passage beds between the Mesozoic and Tertiary, in some places having a considerable affinity with the Danian and in others with that of the lower Eocene. CUVILLIER (1930) regarded them as true Danian age. BLANCKENHORN (1921) put the Esna Shale in the middle Danian, having a transition forms, which is mainly Cretaceous with a few Tertiary forms. NAKKADY (1950) studied the foraminifera of the Esna Shale from many widely separated localities in Egypt, and concluded that the Esna Shale fauna is transitional, having Cretaceous affinities below, and iocene affinities above, and thus followed BEADNELL (1905) in regarding .the Esna Shale as passage beds between the Cretaceous and the Eocene. YOUSSEP (1954) gave a description of the Gebel Aweina in the Nile Valley, near Esna. He assigned the lower part of the Esna Shale "Dakhla Shale" to the Maestrichtian

, the upper part of this unit and the overlying Chalk to the Danian and the Esna Shale is given Paleocene age. SAID & KENAWY (1956) described the foraminifera of the upper Cretaceous Lower Tertiary succession of the Nekhl and Giddi section in northern Sinai. They considered the Esna Shale as Danian age in its lower part and Paleocene in its upper part. NAKKADY (1959) described the biostratigraphy of the Urn Alghana-