[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Reference works](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference) › [An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989) › v2.c38.166 # An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v2.c38.166 An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v2.c38.166 - **Language:** English ### [v2.c38.166](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38.166) In 1935-6 N.G. Majumdar (\*ASI—AR 1935-6\*, p. 55; \*1936-7\*, p. 47) re-examined four mounds with important results. He found that all of them were earthen burial memorials with burnt-brick revetments, two being faced with a brick lining in a double tier, so that there was no justification for regarding them as more earthen barrows. He also pointed out that the gold leaves found by Bloch had their exact replica in the \*stūpa\* at PIPRAWA which is definitely a Buddhist \*stūpa\* of 300 B.C. or earlier. The respective Lauriya \*stūpas\* might be of a comparable date and there is nothing to connect them with Vedic burial rites. The layers of yellow clay which had a share in the building up of the Vedic theory of Bloch are according to the observations of the writer nothing but mud bricks, husk and straw being a not uncommon ingredient of ancient brick. - [Previous: v2.c38.165](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38.165) - [Next: v2.c38.167](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38.167) - [Up: v2.c38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38.166](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v2.c38.166) · Pramāṇa