Stirrup used in a sentence

Stirrup in a sentence as a noun

Yeah he did, it was called the stirrup.

Avars and the stirrup, kinghts and the body armor, Turks and the cannon, etc, etc...

So, the stirrup, eyeglasses, agriculture, our control of fire.

And like I said, the saddle and stirrup made significant changes to the way cavalry were used in battle. Sure, it didn't change as fast as we've seen in the past couple of hundred years, but nothing else has either.

Incidentally, it is remarkable that it took 1000 years for the stirrup to spread across eurasia. I have no good explanation for this.

Riding boots need something to stiffen the sole, since all the load is on the stirrup bar. Ariat used to use steel, but this caused so much hassle at airport metal detectors that Ariat switched to carbon fiber.

Even if he didn't think it, as what he thinks shouldn't matter unless he wants the stirrup to continue. He's supposed to be a politician, or even just a grown up person after all, not a child who cannot control himself.

>Surely, someone would have eventually invented the stirrup, given ridable horses. This isn't obvious to me.

I think the point being made is that it's nearly impossible and very unsafe to get on top of a horse while wearing heavy armor without stirrups. Hence, the stirrup would have acted as the enabler of heavy cavalry use in battle.

Since I learned to ride I became skeptical of the importance of the stirrup for combat. It's a balance aid, but it doesn't actually stop you going backwards. It's even possible to jump without stirrups although it requires more training.

It's just that the added load caused the V-brake stirrup to bend open over time, and then it finally popped out in that situation. I think idea that disc brakes, mechanical or hydraulic, are "more powerful" than V-brakes or canti's is a misunderstanding.

>Surely, someone would have eventually invented the stirrup, given ridable horses. The key word is eventually.

If the stirrup had clearly been invented at a different time than the emergence of feudalism, then the hypothesis would not have been advanced in the first place.

Then after a year of using that, the aluminum stirrup that the brake noodle slides into bent enough for the noodle to pop out, putting my front brake out of service. This happened while I was applying braking power during a steep downhill descent going 35-40km/h, I lost control and fell off the bike. The stirrup wasn't designed to handle the braking forces I was applying to it with the new brake pads, so over time it bent outwards and eventually gave way.

A strong claim for causality requires a counterfactual scenario: if the stirrup hasn’t been invented, then ___. I always find these hard to imagine when the cause is a basic technological development. Surely, someone would have eventually invented the stirrup, given ridable horses.

I'm not familiar enough with horse riding to provide a better example, but the high-backed cavalry saddle and stirrup were, at the time, considered advancements in military technology. Even the fact that you can ride horses for pleasure rather than by necessity is thanks to technologies such as the automobile.

>Surely, someone would have eventually invented the stirrup, given ridable horses. Perhaps, though the stirrup as we think of it shows up a lot later than horseriding does. Although the stirrup seems obvious at first glance, it requires a number of advances in saddles to support, or at least to take full advantage of them. That said, as the article points out, you don't need stirrups to have cavalry, or even heavy cavalry.

Rome wasn’t as big on cavalry as later European armies because the stirrup had not yet been invented at the time. The stirrup appeared only in the late first millennium BC/early first millennium AD in Asia, and incidentally was a big part of why the nomadic steppe societies of Asia were able to conquer their way so far into the west during the Age of Migrations.

The saddle and the stirrup were also widely implemented at this time, allowing cavalry to take a significantly different and powerful role in warfare. The middle east in particular is generally considered to have had its golden period during this time, a flourishing place of learning and technological advancement.

Genghis Khan had a technological advantage over his competitors: the mongolian bow, the stirrup, the logistical ability to coordinate over a distance that was unthinkable for most of the other nations that ever tried to chase nomads into the steppes and then all the knowledge and tools necessary to forage in the steppe.

Quote Examples using Stirrup

As recommended by PG. Technically a textbook, it was a dry and drab look at the history of various innovations during Midlevel times - the stirrup, the windmill, etc. The 30,000ft view is that when innovations are introduced it takes a long time both for them to spread and for someone to finally exploit them to their greatest contributive state. While the steam engine was not invented until 1712, all of the components had been available since Roman times. It took quite a long time to find one of the greatest uses of those innovations. At least, it used to take a long time - Now, information and innovation spread much faster. Society moves much faster. The innovation of the stirrup took a thousands years to propagate.

Anonymous