574 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



May 1 



the honey-producer where the main honey- 

 tiow comes on the last of June or first of July. 

 Mr. Alexander's locality does not have its 

 main flow until some weeks later. During 

 the long period of warm weather before the 

 buckwheat comes into bloom, there would 

 necessarily be a large amount of brood-rear- 

 ing, and it is probable that no amount of 

 heavy feeding in the fall would give the bees 

 all the stores they require until the buckwheat 

 opened up. Here is, obviously, a condition 

 very different from that spoken of in the ar- 

 ticles by the anti-spring-feeder people. 



This whole matter 

 really resolves itself 

 down to this: Spring 

 feeding is really a ques- 

 tion of locality. Alex- 

 ander is right in advis- 

 ing and practicing 

 spring feeding for a lo- 

 cality with a late flow 

 like his. No one who 

 has seen the big popu- 

 lous colonies he has, 

 and the big crops of 

 honey he secures, can 

 really call in question 

 his methods for his con- 

 ditions; for the proof of 

 the pudding is in the 

 eating. 



In Europe, spring feeding is not advised. 

 When practiced it is called speculative feed- 

 ing because it is problematical whether it 

 will pay or not. — Ed.] 



ident, from all we know, that the Greeks 

 were well informed in bee culture before the 

 Christian era; but it may be they borrowed 

 their knowledge from the Egyptians, as many 

 others did. It would not do us much good 

 now if we did know who invented the bar 

 hive. In any event, it was in actual use all 

 through the Dark Ages down to the time 

 when the celebrated Delia Rocca resurrected 

 it in the islands of the Egean Sea, and called 

 attention to its merits. 



Maraldi, the Italian scientist, was the orig- 

 inator of the one-comb- at-a-time idea, for he 



THE EVOLUTION OF HIVES. 



BY W. K. MORRISON. 



The first real effort to improve hives was 

 probably the Greek flower-pot hive with bars 

 across it, for the bees to attach their combs 

 to. To make the roof movable, and also to 



huber's experiment hive. 



provide parallel bars for the combs, was quite 

 a step in advance over the crude cylindrical 

 hive of the Egyptians, though it is quite pos- 

 sible the latter were the inventors of the bar 

 hive, and the Greeks only copyists. It is ev- 



HDBER S leaf HIVE, ARRANGED FOR MAKING INCREASE. 



was the inventor of the observatory hive. 

 He placed a comb between two large glass 

 plates, so that he might be the better able to 

 watch their movements. He did not com- 

 prehend the value of a bee-space, and conse- 

 quently he got the glass plates too far apart 

 the get the best results. In the Maraldi hive 

 the bees very frequently built the combs 

 crosswise. This did not do any material 

 harm, as it is actually easier to see what the 

 bees are doing, particularly in the cells, wh^n 

 the combs are placed across instead of longi- 

 tudinally. Maraldi, by his invention, gave a 

 great impetus to the study of the honey- 

 bee, and laid the foundation 

 for greater things yet to come. 

 Reaumur made great use of 

 Maraldi's invention, but we do 

 not know just how he made his 

 discoveries. He made a great 

 advance in our knowledge of 

 bees, more particularly as re- 

 gards what their habits are 

 while in the hive. 



Huber followed in Rt^aumur's 

 foots'eps and made great use of 

 the observation hive. He com- 

 plained of the bees building the 

 combs crosswise of the hive, and 

 he soon saw the necessity of 

 narrowing the space. In 1789 

 he invented a hive in which 

 each comb was constructed in 

 separate frames. His object 

 in doing this was to enable him to take a 

 colony of bees and their combs all to pieces 

 whenever he desired, and also to put it to- 

 gether again when the examination was fin- 

 ished. In doing this he showed a consummate 



