What is this bonnet/headgear called

[gsmacleod]

I'll hazard a guess that what's being called the "outlander hat" here, which is more like a slouchy watch cap (toboggan), or something that closely resembled it, was probably more common than anything else because it was simple to knit and, moreover, kept your bloody head warm and somewhat dry.

While the "Outlander" style is simple to knit, balmoral bonnets are also very simple to knit and, if you wanted it to be semi-waterproof, you were probably going to felt it anyway. The felting process tends to reduce the floppyness of the wool and give it more of a definite shape.

From something like this:


To this:


Shane

[kingandrew]

Richard,

You may be amused to hear that Rastas call their knit caps--wait for it--"Tams!" So I'm guessing that any resemblance to a Scottish bonnet is somewhat intentional.

Andrew

[Hawk]

It appears we may have something close to being in common.... 😁

While the "Outlander" style is simple to knit, balmoral bonnets are also very simple to knit and, if you wanted it to be semi-waterproof, you were probably going to felt it anyway. The felting process tends to reduce the floppyness of the wool and give it more of a definite shape.

From something like this:


To this:


Shane

[Jock Scot]

....................

I mean, look back through this thread. Every "traditional" hat has one thing in common. There's an "up" side and there's a "slouch" side. Where did that come from? I don't think any military or anybody trying to be a trend-setter said, "Let's go with a hat that's droopy on “.

Purely as a guess, I suspect the “up” side on military and some civilian bonnets, might be that a balmoral, beret or a tam probably started when Regimental and Clan badges, plant badges even, started to be worn on the bonnet. Worn that way the badge is clearly shown to all and not hidden by the cloth overhang. In the general mayhem of battle, as the picture above clearly demonstrates, fighting the wrong chap could cause upset, not only for the individual, but to the commanders in the field who needed to know who was who.

After all, in this modern day and age “ blue on blue” incidents still unfortunately do happen. So back then with all that smoke and general mayhem going on and at close quarters knowing who is friend and who is the foe was not always that easy.

[DCampbell16B]

To follow on with what Jock Scot said, there is a book called The Lyon in Mourning. I don't have access to a copy, so this is all from memory (perhaps someone can help?). The book was a collection of stories of the '45 from the people there. One of them concerns a man about to be bayoneted by an English soldier. The man had enough English to tell the soldier to stop, and that he was with the Argyll Militia. The only was to tell the difference between the Jacobites and the Argyll Militia was that the Jacobites wore a white cockade, while the Argyll Militia wore a red or yellow ribbon. The man claimed he had "lost" his bonnet, so there was no way to tell. However, the soldier bought it and let him go.