Robert Brenchley wrote:
> Is there any record of why the early foundation manufacturers chose the
> worker cell sizes they did?


I have a wonderful book, known I am sure to most on this list: "The ABC of
Bee Culture" by A.I. Root. Mine is the 1891 edition.

In the section on honeycomb, it gives a good idea of the accepted cell
spacing at that time in the US:


"The worker-comb measures very nearly five cells to the inch, on an average.
Some specimens average a little larger, and some a little smaller; but when
the comb is at all irregular, it is quite apt to be a little larger. The
best specimens of true worker-comb generally contain 5 cells within the
space of an inch, and therefore this measure has been adopted for the comb
foundation.

We tried to so improve the bee as to make them take cells 4 1/2 to the inch,
but we had to give it up, and believe God knew best when he taught them that
five is right."


The second paragraph is a footnote written by Gilbert Doolittle and added in
1880. I love the idea of God measuring things in inches.

So the "five-to-the-inch" norm dates back at least to 1880, and I feel sure
to the first edition of the book in 1877.



I have a second book, "A Treatise on the Management of Bees" by Thomas
Wildman, published in London in 1770 (mine is a 1970 facsimile). This is
described in the preface as an abstract of papers written by Meraldi and de
Reamur for presentation to the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris.

Page 22:
"We have found in divers combs, that were a foot long, between fixty and
fixty-fix ranges of cells"

So it seems that a measurement made at least 232 years ago (and probably
longer) gives a range of 4.6mm - 5.1mm for natural comb. Beware, though, of
problems with converting from French units of measure: Wildman says that
this translates to "a little less than two lines". At 12 to the inch, two
lines translates to 4.23mm; "a little less" might be 4.1mm.


Hope this helps.
Martin Hall