摘要
有学者认为,战国汉唐青铜镜表面并未镀锡,其“黑漆古”表层是高锡青铜基体在腐殖酸作用下自然形成的。该文依据有关试验和文献资料,提出了一些不同的看法:(1)现有腐殖酸处理试样从颜色、光泽到表面成分和表层结构,与古镜“黑漆古”都是不同的;(2)“腐殖酸富集说”解释不了“水银沁”镜、“花背”镜等的表面现象,以及一般铜镜的加工工艺;(3)它没有一条文献记载可以为据。笔者依旧认为:“黑漆古”是古镜镀锡表层自然腐蚀的结果,这是既有实物资料,也有文献记载为凭的。
Some scholars believe that the bronze mirrors from the Warring States to the Han-Tang Period are not plated with tin on their surfaces and that the 'Hei-Qi-Gu' layer coloured like black paint on the surfaces are formed naturally due to the action of humic acid on the high-tin hasal body. In the light of relevant experiments, literature and data, this paper puts forward different views as follows:(1)Whether in colour,lustre,surface composition or the construction of surface layer,the available samples treated with humic acid are all not the same as the 'Hei-Qi-Gu' of ancient bronze mirrors;(2) The viewpoint about the action of humic acid cannot explain the surface phenomena of 'mercury-soaked' mirrors,mirrors 'with a decorated back', or the processing technology for ordinary bronze mirrors;(3)There is not a single account in literature that can be used as basis for this viewpoint. The author still holds that 'Hei-Qi-Gu'is the result of the natural corrosion of the tin-plated surface layer of ancient bronze mirrors, and for this there is evidence not only by the data of material objects, but also by accounts in literature.
出处
《自然科学史研究》
CSCD
1996年第2期170-178,共9页
Studies in The History of Natural Sciences