Why all the negative comments on Flat Caps?

[M. A. C. Newsome]

My thoughts on why I do not prefer to wear the Balmoral or the Glengarry is because it seems to be more military minded. I know in other posts, I have stated I wanted a caubeen, which is seen as a military head wear, but it's roots are with the common people.

Again, you are more than entitled to wear or not wear whatever style of cap you want, but I have to question the justification behind it. You say you do not like the Balmoral or Glengarry because they have military connotations, but like the caubeen, even though it is a military cap, because it has common (civilian) origins....

...but the same is true of the Balmoral and glengarry.

This article of mine details some of that history:
http://albanach.org/hummel.htm

Basically, the Balmoral and Glengarry both derive from the old broad bonnet, which itself derives from an even older style of bonnet once common across much of Europe (which is likely the origin of the caubeen, as well).

Point is, though all of these styles of cap are worn, or have been worn, in a military context, they are all civilian in their origin and none have ever ben restricted to military use.

[timseh]

Again, you are more than entitled to wear or not wear whatever style of cap you want, but I have to question the justification behind it. You say you do not like the Balmoral or Glengarry because they have military connotations, but like the caubeen, even though it is a military cap, because it has common (civilian) origins....

...but the same is true of the Balmoral and glengarry.

This article of mine details some of that history:
http://albanach.org/hummel.htm

Basically, the Balmoral and Glengarry both derive from the old broad bonnet, which itself derives from an even older style of bonnet once common across much of Europe (which is likely the origin of the caubeen, as well).

Point is, though all of these styles of cap are worn, or have been worn, in a military context, they are all civilian in their origin and none have ever ben restricted to military use.

I don't mean to speak for anyone else, and I'm not discounting what you're saying, but at first glance, I think you may have misunderstood the statement. I read his original statement on the matter to mean the Balmoral and Glengarry 'look' more military or may be connected with the military in the minds of the general public than the Caubeen.

I guess I viewed it kind of like choosing to wear (not with a kilt of course) a Pea Coat or a Camo Field Jacket. Both have their origins in the Military, but people don't look at a Pea Coat in quite the same way (in general) as they do the field jacket.

[macwilkin]

I don't mean to speak for anyone else, and I'm not discounting what you're saying, but at first glance, I think you may have misunderstood the statement. I read his original statement on the matter to mean the Balmoral and Glengarry 'look' more military or may be connected with the military in the minds of the general public than the Caubeen.

I guess I viewed it kind of like choosing to wear (not with a kilt of course) a Pea Coat or a Camo Field Jacket. Both have their origins in the Military, but people don't look at a Pea Coat in quite the same way (in general) as they do the field jacket.

But the caubeen is connected with the military as well, namely the Irish regiments of the British Commonwealth forces, as well as the Irish Defence Forces.

Regards,

Todd