 <unk> was <unk> the artifact was indeed a vase , mentioning that <unk> , after his analysis of the <unk> object ( published in 1975 ) , " attempted to relate the metal to <unk> natural antimony " ( i.e. native metal ) and that " the antimony objects from <unk> are all small personal ornaments . " This weakens the evidence for a lost art " of rendering antimony malleable . " 
