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.