Stirrup for (urgent?) coments

Matchlock · 19th May 2011, 07:24 PM

I fully agree with Jim.

The shape of the shell first arose in the 16th c. but was traditionally and regionally kept well up to the 19th c., so '2nd half18th c.' would seem very consistent with form as well as wear of this interesting stirrup.

Best,
Michael

Atlantia · 19th May 2011, 07:53 PM

Hi Guys,

I answered this one in the Ethno section. I've only ever seen these described as 'Spanish Colonial' or specifically attributed to various south american countries.
If you have a look on the 'bay' and search for 'spanish colonial stirrup' or 'conquistador stirrup' there are always a fair few.
I could be wrong, but I thought that they were used right up to (and probobly into) the 20thC?

Best
Gene

Matchlock · 19th May 2011, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlantia

Hi Guys,

I could be wrong, but I thought that they were used right up to (and probobly into) the 20thC?

Best
Gene

Hi Gene,

That's well possible. I only assumed it was a bit earlier because of its considerable wear and patina but of course that may have happened within a hundred years as well.

Best,
Michael

laEspadaAncha · 19th May 2011, 09:00 PM

Hi Michael,

You'll encounter these often in estate collections here in the Southwest. I've seen them described in multiple curatorial collections as "Spanish Colonial" and have represented them as such myself. In fact, I have a pair currently on loan to a local museum.

It is my understanding these were used from the 17th-18th C. onwards in New Spain territories. I have one pair with a mark that was attributed to a Mexico City maker and dated ca. 1750. As I understand it, it was not uncommon for Spanish cannon to be melted down to be recast as utilitarian implements, these stirrups included.

While often described as "Conquistador stirrups," I personally think it is more likely that a majority of these were used by the merchant-class and colonial settlers. Either way, one cannot dispute the functionality provided by a protective brass/bronze shell.

I also believe (as has been stated) these were produced well into the 20th century. The example you show seems to indicate honest use and wear.

Regards,

Chris

Matchlock · 19th May 2011, 09:04 PM

Hi Chris,

Thank you so much for this comprehensive enlightenment! I was not that wrong in the end ...

'Nando, was that helpful?

Best,
Michael

laEspadaAncha · 20th May 2011, 06:24 PM

Hi 'Nando,

It these Days of Distraction I have been trudging through as of late, I mistakingly read this thread as having been started by Michael, not yourself. While it is always a pleasure to exchange posts with Michael, in retrospect, I meant to and should have addressed my initial post to you... Sorry about that.

Anyway, I hope it you were able to receive the responses from Jim, Gene, Michael, and I before you had to leave...

I've been in that position before myself, and credit the collectors on the forum for saving me money I nearly spent on a knock-off Warring States period bronze jian.

Regards,

Chris

fernando · 20th May 2011, 07:22 PM

Thank you all Gentlemen for your prompt cooperation.
Having the first (enligtening) answer come from Gene in the Ethno section (where i had copied the thread), i felt much influenced and made my option to let this item go.
When i later read the other impressions from Jim, David, Michl and Chris i was already on my way home.
In a way this wasn't so bad, as parts of your posts would make me hesitate and chewing second thoughts.
So i had (and have) to deal with the consideration that this thing would be a Chinese knock-off ... be it right or wrong

.
Concerning the considerable wear and patina look, when it comes to Chinese stuff, is a characteristic that must be taken with a pinch of salt, according to what i have learnt; those guys can be brilliant, when it comes to such area of cosmetics.
Thanks again fellows.

19th May 2011, 07:24 PM	#1
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	I fully agree with Jim. The shape of the shell first arose in the 16th c. but was traditionally and regionally kept well up to the 19th c., so '2nd half18th c.' would seem very consistent with form as well as wear of this interesting stirrup. Best, Michael

19th May 2011, 07:53 PM	#2
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	Hi Guys, I answered this one in the Ethno section. I've only ever seen these described as 'Spanish Colonial' or specifically attributed to various south american countries. If you have a look on the 'bay' and search for 'spanish colonial stirrup' or 'conquistador stirrup' there are always a fair few. I could be wrong, but I thought that they were used right up to (and probobly into) the 20thC? Best Gene

19th May 2011, 09:00 PM	#4
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	Hi Michael, You'll encounter these often in estate collections here in the Southwest. I've seen them described in multiple curatorial collections as "Spanish Colonial" and have represented them as such myself. In fact, I have a pair currently on loan to a local museum. It is my understanding these were used from the 17th-18th C. onwards in New Spain territories. I have one pair with a mark that was attributed to a Mexico City maker and dated ca. 1750. As I understand it, it was not uncommon for Spanish cannon to be melted down to be recast as utilitarian implements, these stirrups included. While often described as "Conquistador stirrups," I personally think it is more likely that a majority of these were used by the merchant-class and colonial settlers. Either way, one cannot dispute the functionality provided by a protective brass/bronze shell. I also believe (as has been stated) these were produced well into the 20th century. The example you show seems to indicate honest use and wear. Regards, Chris

19th May 2011, 09:04 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Chris, Thank you so much for this comprehensive enlightenment! I was not that wrong in the end ... 'Nando, was that helpful? Best, Michael

20th May 2011, 06:24 PM	#6
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	Hi 'Nando, It these Days of Distraction I have been trudging through as of late, I mistakingly read this thread as having been started by Michael, not yourself. While it is always a pleasure to exchange posts with Michael, in retrospect, I meant to and should have addressed my initial post to you... Sorry about that. Anyway, I hope it you were able to receive the responses from Jim, Gene, Michael, and I before you had to leave... I've been in that position before myself, and credit the collectors on the forum for saving me money I nearly spent on a knock-off Warring States period bronze jian. Regards, Chris

20th May 2011, 07:22 PM	#7
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Thank you all Gentlemen for your prompt cooperation. Having the first (enligtening) answer come from Gene in the Ethno section (where i had copied the thread), i felt much influenced and made my option to let this item go. When i later read the other impressions from Jim, David, Michl and Chris i was already on my way home. In a way this wasn't so bad, as parts of your posts would make me hesitate and chewing second thoughts. So i had (and have) to deal with the consideration that this thing would be a Chinese knock-off ... be it right or wrong . Concerning the considerable wear and patina look, when it comes to Chinese stuff, is a characteristic that must be taken with a pinch of salt, according to what i have learnt; those guys can be brilliant, when it comes to such area of cosmetics. Thanks again fellows.