Hi All.

    Is there any record of why the early foundation manufacturers chose the
worker cell sizes they did? As far as I can tell from the incessant 'five
cells to the inch' of old British bee books, the first foundation used here
was probably about 5.1mm. Dee says that that first used in the States was a
bit smaller - I seem to remember it was 4.83mm. Obviously there is no such
thing as a single 'natural comb size'; rather there is a natural range. If I
understand some recent posters correctly, they are saying that the 'natural'
average is about 5.3mm. If that's correct, why did early foundation makers
choose a size significantly smaller than average?

Regards,

Robert Brenchley

[log in to unmask]
Birmingham, UK.