鋁

十萬個為甚麼化學篇
鋁是誰發現的？

大陸版, 少年兒童出版社, 1961 (第一版)
台灣版, 陽明書局, 1997

Butler et al. (1986) "Aluminium Objects from a Jin Dynasty Tomb – Can They Be Authentic?".
Interdisciplinary Sci. Rev. 11 (1): 88–94. (doi.org/10.1179/isr.1986.11.1.88)

Abstract:

Pieces of aluminium, supposedly parts of a set of belt ornaments, were found in a Jin dynasty (AD 265–420) tomb during excavations in the 1950s. The authenticity of these finds was questioned at the time in view of the technology required to isolate aluminium from its ore.
*
In this review the archaeological and analytical evidence is reconsidered, but the matter remains unsettled, as it is known, from experimental evidence, that aluminium alloys can be prepared by the carbon reduction of alumina.
*
Examination of the thermodynamic data for this process in terms of Ellingham diagrams demonstrates unequivocally that the temperature required for this process is greatly in excess of that possible with Jin dynasty technology, and so the finds cannot be authentic.
*
However, it is quite possible that metallic objects containing small quantities of aluminium could have been produced in China at that time. The review ends with some speculation on how the pieces of aluminium came to be in the tomb.

寫得很客氣, 但意思十分明確.

* * *

其實, 1972 年大陸學者已鑑定出周處墓帶飾各件均為銀質合金. 只有雜於其中的一細小不成形殘片為鋁合金 [1].

似乎到了 1990 年代初, 大陸又有人猜測, 說該殘片是由天然鋁 native aluminium 製成 [2]. Butler 說:

The review ends with some speculation on how the pieces of aluminium came to be in the tomb.

可惜我看不到全文 [3].

[1,2] 見 許宏, 西晉周處墓鋁片的身世之謎, 大眾考古 2021-04.

[3] See Beachcombing's Blog: The Nanking Belt. See also Reddit: ShinyHitmonlee's post

the blog correctly points out that there are only two explanations: It was a hoax (or a joke that got out of hand) on the part of one of the archeologists, or the ancient Chinese somehow had either a source or a way of refining pure aluminum. The second is obviously much more intriguing.