Marcel Grateau
Precursor
Technical approach: Temporary heated waving
A heated iron shapes hair temporarily; washing or moisture can undo the wave.
What this changes or asks: A precursor, not a permanent-wave machine.
New case study: Mayer versus Joyner
Two original patents, two different engineering problems: heater geometry versus machine support.
Explore the illustrated patent comparison →What did each inventor change?
Explore the technical problems behind the different systems: winding, heating, apparatus construction and chemistry.
Open the Innovation Atlas →The central question
Not one machine. A tree of technical solutions.
The history of permanent waving is not a straight line of ever-better devices. Inventors addressed different problems: how to apply heat, how to wind short hair, how to support heavy apparatus, how to protect the scalp, and eventually how to reduce reliance on heated machines. A shared technical challenge does not, by itself, prove a direct line of influence.
Four questions for every branch: What problem was the inventor addressing? What technical principle was proposed? What changed in the apparatus or procedure? What contemporary evidence shows whether it was used?
Three ways to explore the evidence
This development tree maps related technical problems, not a proven family tree of inventions. Follow each branch to its technical explanation and documentary basis.
A growing catalogue
The systems and the people behind them
Karl Ludwig Nessler
Documented
Technical approach: Heat + winding + chemical treatment
Hair is wound and treated with heat and chemicals to achieve a lasting change of shape.
What this changes or asks: Established a practical permanent-waving approach demonstrated in London in 1906.
Gallia system
Under investigation
Technical approach: Alternative electrical machine construction
French systems are reported in the early permanent-wave market; the precise engineering difference requires contemporary apparatus evidence.
What this changes or asks: Do not infer lighter weight or improved safety without a specification.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Étienne Szeemann
Under investigation
Technical approach: Reported thermal and winding variations
Investigate whether the documented system changed winding geometry, heat delivery or salon workflow.
What this changes or asks: Technical claims remain provisional until matched to patents or dated trade sources.
Eugène François Suter
Patent lead
Technical approach: Differentiated electrical heating
The proposed design addresses the distribution of heat during treatment, rather than inventing permanence anew.
What this changes or asks: Patent attribution and the precise switching mechanism should be checked against the complete specification.
Isidoro Calvete / Icall
Under investigation
Technical approach: Electrical heaters and apparatus production
Focus on the design and manufacture of heating equipment associated with the commercial salon systems.
What this changes or asks: Separate Calvete’s documented manufacturer role from any specific personal invention.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Croquignole method
Method
Technical approach: Winding from the ends toward the scalp
A different geometry of hair winding changed the treatment of shorter hairstyles and called for appropriate heating equipment.
What this changes or asks: A method with several historical contributors, not a single inventor by default.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Josef Mayer
Patent verified
Technical approach: A heater opening sideways around the curler
Two semicylindrical heated shells mounted on scissor-like handles could be placed laterally over a wrapped strand.
What this changes or asks: US 1,619,794, published 1 March 1927; filing 19 March 1925.
Marjorie Stewart Joyner
Patent verified
Technical approach: A supporting dome, clamps and scalp protection
A dome supports electrical irons; suspended clamps help carry their weight, while protective elements separate the apparatus from the scalp.
What this changes or asks: US 1,693,515, granted 27 November 1928.
Charles Frederics
Under investigation
Technical approach: Commercial apparatus and distribution
Investigate how branded machinery, training and salon distribution shaped the adoption of permanent waving.
What this changes or asks: The precise patented technical novelty remains to be identified.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Arnold F. Willatt / cold wave
Historical transition
Technical approach: Chemical permanent waving without large heated machines
A major shift away from electrically heated salon apparatus toward chemical treatment at lower temperatures.
What this changes or asks: The transition was not a simple improvement to Nessler’s heater.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Digital perm systems
Contemporary comparison
Technical approach: Electronic temperature control + chemistry
Contemporary heated-rod systems combine chemical treatment with electronically managed heating and timing.
What this changes or asks: A recurring principle, not proof of direct descent from a particular 1906 machine.
Source identification in progress — no patent attribution asserted
Evidence-led connections
How strong is each proposed connection?
Similar technical features do not by themselves prove that one inventor copied, improved or directly influenced another. The table identifies the type of evidence currently available.
| Branch or system | Documented starting point | What must not be assumed |
|---|---|---|
| Nessler | 1906 London public demonstration; subsequent patent and trade documentation. | That every later electric permanent-wave apparatus descends directly from one Nessler machine. |
| Josef Mayer | US 1,619,794, filed 1925, granted 1927; heater construction associated with flat winding. | That the patent alone proves invention of the entire flat-winding method or broad commercial adoption. |
| Marjorie Stewart Joyner | US 1,693,515, granted 1928; arrangement and support of multiple heating elements. | That Joyner's device is a modification of Mayer's apparatus without documentary evidence. |
| Eugène François Suter | US 1,266,879 (1918) and GB 111372 (1917). | That the existence of patents establishes production volume or usage. |
| Gallia, Szeemann and Icall | Historical references and, for Icall, an attributed apparatus photograph; further corroboration required. | Specific patented innovations or a documented line of technical descent. |
| Chemical cold wave and digital perm | Distinct chemical and electronically controlled technical approaches. | That shared use of winding, chemicals or heat proves a direct patent lineage. |
Research principle: A patent documents an invention as disclosed and claimed; an advertisement documents marketing; a surviving photograph documents an apparatus or depiction. Establishing manufacture, use and influence requires additional sources.
Review the source register → · Explore the technical atlas →
Evidence in focus
Two inventions, two different problems
Josef Mayer (1927): a lateral-opening heater for flat-wound strands. Marjorie Stewart Joyner (1928): a supporting dome, suspended clamping devices and scalp protection. Both are documented by original United States patent specifications, but they answer different design questions.
Josef Mayer: inspect the original drawing
The complete patent drawing is linked rather than enlarged from a low-resolution reproduction. This avoids presenting an unreadable image as evidence.
View US Patent 1,619,794 and its original illustrations ↗
Key feature: two heated semicylindrical shells mounted on scissor-like handles, opened sideways around the curler.
A modern branch
From heated rods to digital perms
Modern digital-perm systems use electrically heated rods and electronic temperature control alongside chemical treatment. The resemblance to early heated-rod methods is historically interesting, but a similar principle is not proof that a modern product directly descends from a particular Nessler apparatus.
Historical comparison: Nessler’s method combined winding, chemistry and electrical heat. Later systems diversified winding, heating, support and chemical processes. Today’s digital perms recombine heated rods and chemical treatment with electronic controls. This is a comparison of technical principles, not a claimed unbroken genealogy.
Research method
What would prove a branch?
To show direct influence, we look for patent citations, inventor correspondence, dated advertisements, company catalogues, technical descriptions or explicit contemporary comparisons. A patent establishes the proposed design, not necessarily manufacture, market success or superiority. Where documentation is incomplete, we mark the connection as an open research question.
Sources: Mayer US 1,619,794; Joyner US 1,693,515; ongoing historical research catalogue.
Explore in depth
Six research chapters
Origins & the Nessler System
The foundational problem: making a wave last
Early Competing Systems
Gallia, Szeemann, Suter and Calvete: alternative approaches
Winding Techniques
How the geometry of winding changed permanent waving
Machine Design & Salon Equipment
Supporting, protecting and operating the apparatus
The Chemical Cold Wave
A different route to permanent hair shaping
Modern Digital Perm
When a historical principle appears in new equipment