Visual Complex Analysis 25Th Anniversary Edition Tristan Needham 2 All Chapter

Visual Complex Analysis: 25th
Anniversary Edition Tristan Needham

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/visual-complex-analysis-25th-anniversary-edition-trist
an-needham-2/
V I S UA L C O M P L E X A N A LY S I S
VISUAL
CO MPL EX
ANALYSIS
T R I S TA N N E E D H A M
UNIVERSIT Y OF SAN FRANCISCO
Foreword by
ROGER PENROSE
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Tristan Needham 2023
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First edition published in 1997
25th Anniversary Edition 2023
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022948019
ISBN 978–0–19–286891–6 (hbk.)
ISBN 978–0–19–286892–3 (pbk.)
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192868916.001.0001
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
For
Roger Penrose
and
George Burnett-Stuart
FOREWORD
Roger Penrose
Complex analysis is the theory of functions of complex numbers or, more specif-
ically, holomorphic functions of such numbers. This theory is both profoundly
beautiful and vastly influential, both in pure mathematics and in many areas of
application, particularly in physics, indeed being central to the underlying formal-
ism of quantum mechanics. However, the very concept of a complex number is an
essentially abstract one, depending upon the seemingly absurd notion of a square
root of −1, the square of any ordinary real number being, unlike −1, necessarily
non-negative.
Yet, it should be borne in mind that even the notion of a so-called “real” num-
ber is also an abstraction, and we must move far beyond the immediate notion of
“counting numbers” 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, . . ., and beyond even the fractions 21 , 53 , − 47 , etc., if
we are to express even the square root of 2. But here we are helped by a visual image,
and can perceive a straight line extended indefinitely in both directions to give us
a good intuitive impression of the full array of real numbers. The slightly mislead-
ing term “real” for this imagined array is excusable, as we can indeed imagine a
ruler, or a line of ink drawn on a piece of paper, as providing us with some sort of
conceptual image of this array. This greatly helps our understandings of what the
mathematician’s precise notion of a “real number” is intended to idealize. We are
not concerned with whatever might be the nature of the physics of the particles or
fields that might compose our ruler or ink-line; nor, indeed, do we require any con-
cept of the cosmology that may be relevant to the extension out to infinity of our
imagined ruler or ink-line. Our abstract mathematical notion of a “real number”
remains aloof from any such realities of the actual world. Yet, in a curious reversal
of roles, it is this very mathematical idealization that underlies most of our theories
of the actual world.
So, what can be the driving force behind a need to go beyond these seemingly
ubiquitous “real numbers”? What purpose might there be for the introduction of
a “square root of −1”? Such a number fits nowhere within the span of the real
numbers, and it would appear that we have no reason to demand that the equation
x2 + 1 = 0 have any kind of “solution”. The answer to this desire for such entities
lies in the magic that lies hidden within them, but it is not a magic that immediately
reveals itself. In fact, when the first hint of this magic was actually perceived, in
viii Foreword
the mid 16th century, by Girolamo Cardano, and then more completely by Rafael
Bombelli, these strange numbers were dismissed, even by them, as being as useless
as they were mysterious.
It is of some interest to note that it was not in the equation x2 + 1 = 0 that this
hint of magic was first perceived, but in cubic equations like x3 = 15x + 4, which
has the perfectly sensible solution x = 4. Yet, as Bombelli had noted, Cardano’s
general expression for the solution of such cubic equations necessarily involves a
detour into a mysterious world of numbers of a sort where the equation x2 + 1 = 0
is deemed to have the two solutions, now referred to as the imaginary units x = i
and x = −i, of an algebra—now called complex-number algebra—that had appeared
to be consistent, but not what had been regarded as “real”.
This dismissive attitude did not change much until the mid to late 18th cen-
tury, with Leonhard Euler’s remarkable formula eiθ = cos θ + i sin θ and, even
more importantly, the geometrical representation of the entire family of complex
numbers as points in a Euclidean plane, as initially proposed by Caspar Wessel,
where the algebraic operations on complex numbers are readily understood in
geometrical terms. This provided a kind of 2-dimensional “visual reality” to the
array of complex numbers that could be combined with topological notions, such
as employed initially by Carl Friedrich Gauss, and soon followed by others. The
early to mid 19th century saw many important advances, many of these being due
to Augustin-Louis Cauchy, especially with the beauty and the power of contour
integration, and, perhaps most profoundly, with ideas due to Bernhard Riemann.
The very notion of “complex smoothness” of complex functions was expressed
by use of the Cauchy–Riemann equations, and this provided the powerful con-
cept of a holomorphic function that implies that a power-series expansion always
locally exists, this leading to a vast and powerful theory with numerous magical
properties.
The two revolutions of early 20th century physics both owe a profound debt
to complex-number mathematics. This is most manifest with quantum mechanics,
since the basic formalism of that theory depends fundamentally on complex num-
bers and holomorphic functions. We see a remarkable interplay between quantum
spin and the geometry of complex numbers. The basic equations of Schrödinger
and Dirac are both complex equations. In relativity theory, the transformations
relating the visual field of two observers passing close by each other at differ-
ent relativistic speeds is most easily understood in terms of simple holomorphic
functions. Moreover, many solutions of Einstein’s equations for general relativity
benefit greatly from properties of holomorphic functions, as does the description
of gravitational waves.
In view of the undoubted importance of complex analysis in so much of math-
ematics and physics, it is clearly important that there are basic accounts of these
topics available to those unfamiliar (or only partly familiar) with the basic ideas
Foreword ix
of complex analysis. In this foreword I have very much stressed how the visual
or geometric viewpoint has been of vital importance, not only to the historical
development of complex analysis, but also to the proper understanding of the
subject. Tristan Needham’s Visual Complex Analysis as originally published in 1997
was, to my knowledge, unique in the extent to which it was able to cover these
fundamental ideas with such thoroughness, visual elegance, and clarity.
With this 25th Anniversary Edition there have been some significant improve-
ments, most particularly in the incorporation of captions to the diagrams. This
makes it easier for the reader to dip into the arguments, as illustrated so elegantly in
such wonderfully expressive pictures, without necessarily having to look through
to find the relevant portion of the text. In any case, I am sure that readers, over a
broad range of relevant knowledge—from those with no prior experience of com-
plex analysis to those already experts—will gain greatly from the charm, distinct
originality, and visual clarity of the arguments presented here.
PREFACE TO THE 25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION
Introduction
Mathematical reality exists outside the confines of space and time, but books about
mathematics do not. A quarter century after its publication, I am grateful that an
entirely new generation of mathematicians and scientists has continued to embrace
VCA’s unorthodox, intuitive, and, above all, geometrical approach to Complex
Analysis. To mark the occasion, Oxford University Press has graciously permit-
ted me to revisit the work, resulting in the creation of this significantly improved
25th Anniversary Edition.
Principal Changes in the New Edition

Perhaps I should begin by noting what has not changed. As I shall elaborate below,
back in 1997, one of my key mathematical innovations was the application of New-
ton’s geometrical methods from the Principia (now 335 years old) to the Complex
Analysis of Cauchy and Riemann (now more than 200 years old). Therefore, I have
not seen any need to update the main body of the text, which has remained almost
unchanged, save for a few additional corrections.
All of the changes to this new edition of VCA—both in appearance and
substance—came about as a direct result of the knowledge I gained creating my sec-
ond and final book,1 Visual Differential Geometry and Forms: A Mathematical Drama
in Five Acts, Princeton University Press, 2021 (hereafter abbreviated to VDGF). In
particular, I thank Wanda España of PUP for her beautiful work on the design of
VDGF, for this in turn inspired some design elements that I requested of OUP for
this new edition of VCA. Of course I also thank Oxford University Press for accept-
ing some of these suggestions, while also imprinting their own distinctive style on
the work.
• The most obvious change is in the physical dimensions of the book: it has
expanded from 6 ′′ ×9 ′′ to 7 ′′ ×10 ′′ . There are two significant advantages to
this change: (1) the book is more comfortable to hold and read; (2) the 5032
1
Needham (2021).
2
The original edition only contained 501 figures: The figure in this Preface and [6.41] are both new.
xii Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
figures—the beating heart of the work!—are now 36% larger, and, one may dare
to hope, 36% clearer!
• Another obvious change is the introduction of the standard numbering sys-
tem for sections, subsections, equations, and figures. In hindsight, my deliberate
avoidance of the standard scheme was perhaps a rather childish, tantrum-like
expression of my disgust with the prevailing, life-sucking reduction of wildly
exciting mathematical ideas to the arid structure enshrined in traditional trea-
tises: “Lemma 12.7.2 implies Theorem 14.3.8”. Let me take this opportunity to
apologize—better 25 years late than never?—to every professor who was ever
brave enough to adopt VCA as the text for their course, only to discover that
they had to struggle to refer their students to any given figure or result!
• The Bibliography has been updated. Not only have previously cited works been
updated to their latest editions, but I have also added a number of new works,
which were not cited in the first edition, for the simple reason that 25 years ago
they did not exist!
• The Index has been improved significantly. Many new entries have been added,
and, perhaps more importantly, wherever a single main entry formerly listed
a long, frustratingly unhelpful string of undifferentiated page numbers, I have
now split it into many individual and helpfully specific subentries. By way of proof,
consider the entry for “Jacobian matrix”, then and now!
• Giving credit to Eugenio Beltrami. In the original edition I pointed out that in 1868
Beltrami discovered3 (and published) the conformal models of the hyperbolic
plane, which Poincaré then rediscovered 14 years later, in 1882. Now, following
the example I set myself in VDGF, I have gone one step further, attempting to put
the record straight by renaming these models as the Beltrami–Poincaré disc and
half-plane. Beltrami also discovered the projective model, and I have renamed
that, too, as the Beltrami–Klein model. Correspondingly, my fancifully named
inhabitants of these hyperbolic worlds have been renamed from “Poincarites”
to Beltrami–Poincarites!
• Twenty five years ago, VCA was on the bleeding edge of what was typograph-
ically possible. Indeed, my editor told me that VCA was the first mathematics
book published by Oxford University Press to be composed in LATEX and yet not
to be typeset using the standard Computer Modern fonts designed by Donald
Knuth, the creator of TEX. I was able to achieve this feat by virtue of Michael
Spivak’s4 then newly created MathTime typeface, and by virtue of the wonderful
3
See Milnor (1982), Stillwell (1996), and Stillwell (2010).
4
Yes, the famous differential geometer!
Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition xiii
Y&Y TEX System for Windows.5 I was thereby able to typeset the book in Times
text and (mainly) MathTime mathematics—a vast aesthetic improvement over
Computer Modern, in my humble but strong opinion!
Needless to say, the TEX world has moved on considerably in the past 25 years.
But in order to take advantage of these advances, I was forced to grapple with
the task of updating my original TEX files (including my countless macros) from
the ancient (dead?) language of LATEX2.09 to the modern LATEX 2ε . This effort was
rewarded with the ability to typeset this new edition of VCA using the same type-
faces that I very carefully selected for VDGF, all three of which sprang from the
genius mind of Hermann Zapf (1918–2015): Optima for the headings, Palatino for
the text, and, crucially, the remarkable Euler fonts for the mathematics.
Let me pause for a moment to pay tribute to Zapf’s Euler mathematical fonts.
They would appear to me to be at home onboard the starship of an advanced alien
civilization, yet they also evoke the time-worn stone engravings within an ancient
Greek ruin—their beauty transcends space and time: Picture an inscription on the
Guardian of Forever!6
But my fatal attraction to these fonts brought about conflict between the Euler
mathematics in the text of the new edition and the MathTime mathematics in all
the figures of the original edition. Having been born cursed (and I suppose blessed)
with a compulsion to strive for perfection, I had no choice but to undertake the
self-inflicted, Herculean task of hand-editing (within CorelDRAW) all 501 of my
original, hand-drawn figures! I then output new versions in which each MathTime
symbol is here replaced with its matching Euler counterpart, thereby bringing the
figures into perfect alignment with the new text.
I am the impossibly proud father of remarkable twin daughters, Faith and Hope.
I am also the father of VCA and of VDGF. It is therefore a source of deep, resonating
joy that both sets of twins now look like twins!
• Now let me explain the most fundamental change, the one that took me the
greatest time and effort to accomplish, and the one that I believe transforms this
25th Anniversary Edition into a truly new edition, one that may even be of value
to owners of the original edition.
The 503 figures are the mathematical soul of the work. They crystallize all the
geometrical insights I was able to glean from my many years spent struggling to
understand Complex Analysis. Yet, in the entire original edition, you will not find a
single caption. Why?!
Sadly, the answer is simple: cowardice. As a newly minted DPhil student of Pen-
rose, with no track record or reputation, I feared that the mathematical community
5
Sadly, this system (designed by Professor Berthold Horn of MIT) ceased to exist in 2004.
6
The space–time portal featured in the Star Trek episode, “The City on the Edge of Forever”.
xiv Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
would reject or even ridicule7 my Newtonian arguments. I therefore sought to con-

trol the narrative (literally!) by only revealing the arguments within the text proper,
where I could spell out my reasoning in full.
Well, 25 years later, I am certainly older, perhaps a tad wiser, and I have also
gained a modicum of confidence by virtue of the enthusiastic reviews that VCA has
since received in all the major journals. Perhaps more emotionally significant to me
has been the large number of individual notes of appreciation I have received, which
I continue to receive to this day, from readers of all stripes—graduate students,
professors, and working scientists—from around the globe.
So, finally, I have done something that I should have had the courage to do at
the outset:
In this 25th Anniversary Edition, every figure now has a caption

that fully explains its mathematical content. Additionally, many of
these new captions include a title (in bold print) that further distils
the figure’s meaning down to its essence.
This approach8 is directly inspired by the works of my teacher, friend, and mentor,
Sir Roger Penrose—to whom this book is dedicated, and to whom I now offer sin-
cere thanks for his generous Foreword!—most remarkably in his Road to Reality,9
where a single figure’s caption can take up a quarter of a page!
This innovation now makes it possible to read VCA in an entirely new way—as
a highbrow comic book! Much of the geometrical reasoning of the work can now be
grasped simply by studying a figure and its accompanying caption, only turning
to the main text for the complete explanation as needed. Furthermore, instead of
undertaking a systematic, linear reading of the work, you are now invited to skip
and hop about, lighting upon whichever figure happens to catch your eye.
• Newton’s concept of ultimate equality underlies many of the arguments in this

book, but its use was not made explicit in the original edition, and this led some
to suppose that the arguments were less rigorous than they actually were (and
remain). In this new edition I have only occasionally modified the main text, but
I have felt at liberty to explicitly introduce ultimate equalities into some of the
newly minted captions. As in my earlier works,10 I have used the symbol ≍ to
denote this concept.
Let me now expand upon this vitally important point . . .
7
In my defence, such fears were not entirely groundless: When Princeton University Press sent out
draft chapters of VDGF for review, one of the three anonymous reviewers bluntly declared, “This is
not even mathematics!”
8
This is also my approach in VDGF.
9
Penrose (2005).
10
Needham (1993), Needham (2014).
Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition xv
More on Newton’s Principia and His Concept of Ultimate Equality

As I explain in the original Preface (immediately following this new Preface), VCA
(and VDGF) could never have come to be had I not undertaken a careful study
of Newton’s Principia in 1982, while I was still a DPhil student of Penrose. As I
struggled to penetrate Newton’s ancient diagrams, I intuitively sensed the power
and beauty of his geometrical reasoning, long before I fully understood it.
But one aspect of Newton’s thinking did make sense to me immediately: why
should Newton settle for studying an equation describing the orbit of a planet
around the Sun when he possessed a geometrical tool of enormous power, capa-
ble of instead analyzing the orbit itself ?! This in turn provoked within me a
life-changing mathematical crisis of conscience: how many other mathematical phe-
nomena had I fooled myself into pretending I had understood, when all I had done
was grasp an equation that described the phenomenon from afar, rather than daring
to stare mathematical reality squarely and geometrically in the face?
I felt excited and strangely fearful, like one of the apes in the opening of Stanley
Kubrick’s, 2001: A Space Odyssey, shrieking and wildly leaping about in the stark
silent presence of the black monolith. I wanted to be that one ape that was brave
enough to touch the monolith, now taking the form of a different ancient reservoir
of deeply alien knowledge: Newton’s mind!
So I did. And once I had done so, I stared down at Newton’s geometrical con-
cept of ultimate equality, as the ape had stared down at the large femur bone on
the ground before him, picked it up, gingerly at first, examined it closely, and then
spent the next 35 years of my life wielding it with all the force and ingenuity I
could muster—a tool to crack open and lay bare to our visual intuition the secrets
of Complex Analysis, and, 25 years later, the secrets of Differential Geometry and
Forms.
The presentation of the geometrical reasoning in VDGF appears to be more rig-
orous than that in VCA because there I explicitly make use of Newton’s concept of
ultimate equality. Let me now steal an excerpt from the Prologue of VDGF in order
to explain what this means.
As I have discussed elsewhere,11 Newtonian scholars have painstakingly
dismantled the pernicious myth12 that the results in the 1687 Principia were first
derived by Newton using his original 1665 version of the calculus, and only later
recast into the geometrical form that we find in the finished work.
Instead, it is now understood that by the mid-1670s, having studied Apollonius,
Pappus, and Huygens, in particular, the mature Newton became disenchanted with
11
See Needham (1993), the original 1997 Preface to VCA, and Needham (2014).
12
Sadly, this myth originated with Newton himself, in the heat of his bitter priority battle with
Leibniz over the discovery of the calculus. See Arnol’d (1990), Bloye and Huggett (2011), de Gandt
(1995), Guicciardini (1999), Newton (1687, p.123), and Westfall (1980).
xvi Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
the form in which he had originally discovered the calculus in his youth—which
is different again from the Leibnizian form we all learn in college today—and had
instead embraced purely geometrical methods.
Thus it came to pass that by the 1680s Newton’s algebraic infatuation with power
series gave way to a new form of calculus—what he called the “synthetic method
of fluxions”13 —in which the geometry of the Ancients was transmogrified and
reanimated by its application to shrinking geometrical figures in their moment of
vanishing. This is the potent but non-algorithmic form of calculus that we find in
full flower in his great Principia of 1687.
Let me now immediately spell out Newton’s approach, and in significantly
greater detail than I did in the first edition of VCA, in the vain hope that this
new edition may bolster my efforts in VDGF to inspire more mathematicians and
physicists to adopt Newton’s intuitive (yet rigorous14 ) methods than did the first
edition.
If two quantities A and B depend on a small quantity ϵ, and their ratio
approaches unity as ϵ approaches zero, then I shall avoid the more cumbersome
language of limits by following Newton’s precedent in the Principia, saying simply
that, “A is ultimately equal to B”. Also, as I did in earlier works [(Needham, 1993),
(Needham, 2014)], I shall employ the symbol ≍ to denote this concept of ultimate
equality.15 In short,
A
“A is ultimately equal to B” ⇐⇒ A≍B ⇐⇒ lim
= 1.
B ϵÑ0
It follows [exercise] from the theorems on limits that ultimate equality is an equiv-
alence relation, and that it also inherits additional properties of ordinary equality,
e.g.,
X≍Y&P≍Q =⇒ X · P ≍ Y · Q, and A ≍ B · C ⇐⇒ (A/B) ≍ C.

Before I begin to apply this idea in earnest, I also note that the jurisdiction of
ultimate equality can be extended naturally to things other than numbers, enabling
one to say, for example, that two triangles are “ultimately similar”, meaning that
their angles are ultimately equal.
As I explain in the original Preface, having grasped Newton’s method, I imme-
diately tried my own hand at using it to simplify my teaching of introductory
calculus, only later realizing how I might apply it to Complex Analysis (in VCA),
and later still to Differential Geometry (in VDGF). Though I might choose any num-
ber of simple, illustrative examples [see Needham (1993) for more], I will reuse the
specific one I gave in the original Preface to VCA, and for one simple reason: this
13
See Guicciardini (2009, Ch. 9).
14
Fine print to follow!
15
This notation was subsequently adopted (with attribution) by the Nobel physicist, Subrahmanyan
Chandrasekhar (see Chandrasekhar, 1995, p. 44).
Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition xvii
time I will use the “≍”–notation to present the argument rigorously, whereas in the
first edition I did not. Indeed, this example may be viewed as a recipe for trans-
forming many of VCA’s “explanations” into “proofs”,16 merely by sprinkling on
the requisite ≍’s. With the addition of figure captions, I am now able to do some of
this sprinkling myself, but some must still be left to the reader.
Before looking at this example, I suggest you first read the original presentation
of the argument in the original Preface (immediately following this one) and then
return to this point.
Let us show that if T = tan θ, then dT 2

dθ = 1 + T (see figure). If we increase θ
by a small (ultimately vanishing) amount δθ, then T will increase by the length of
the vertical hypotenuse δT of the small triangle, in which the other two sides of
this triangle have been constructed to lie in the directions (θ + δθ) and (θ + π2 ), as
illustrated. To obtain the result, we first observe that in the limit that δθ vanishes,
the small triangle with hypotenuse δT is ultimately similar to the large triangle
with hypotenuse L, because ψ ≍ π2 . Next, as we see in the magnifying glass, the
side δs adjacent to θ in the small triangle is ultimately equal to the illustrated arc
of the circle with radius L, so δs ≍ L δθ; note that we have moved the dot from the
corner of the triangle to the arc, to stress this point. Thus,
dT δT δT L dT
≍ ≍ ≍ =⇒ = L2 = 1 + T 2 .
Ldθ Lδθ δs 1 dθ
So far as I know, Newton never wrote down this specific example, but compare
the illuminating directness of his style of geometrical reasoning with the unillumi-
nating computations we teach our students today, more than three centuries later!
As Newton himself put it,17 the geometric method is to be preferred by virtue of
the “clarity and brevity of the reasoning involved and because of the simplicity of
the conclusions and the illustrations required.” Indeed, Newton went even further,
resolving that only the synthetic method was “worthy of public utterance”.
16
I was already using the ≍ notation (both privately and in print) at the time of writing VCA, and,
in hindsight, it was a mistake that I did not employ it throughout the original edition of VCA.
17
See Guicciardini (2009, p. 231)
xviii Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
Newton himself did not employ any symbol to represent his concept of “ultimate
equality”. Instead, his devotion to the geometrical method of the Ancients spilled
over into emulating their mode of expression, causing him to write out the words
“ultimately have the ratio of equality” every single time the concept was invoked
in a proof. As Newton (1687, p. 124) explained, the Principia is “written in words at
length in the manner of the Ancients”. Even when Newton claimed that two ratios
were ultimately equal, he insisted on expressing each ratio in words. As a result, I
myself was quite unable to follow Newton’s reasoning without first transcribing
and summarizing each of his paragraphs into “modern” form (which was in fact
already quite common in 1687). Indeed, back in 1982, this was the catalyst for my
private introduction and use of the symbol ≍.
It is my view that Newton’s choice not to introduce a symbol for “ultimate
equality” was a tragically consequential error for the development of mathemat-
ics. As Leibniz’s symbolic calculus swept the world, Newton’s more penetrating
geometrical method fell by the wayside. In the intervening centuries only a hand-
ful of people ever sought to repair this damage and revive Newton’s approach,
the most notable and distinguished recent champion having been V. I. Arnol’d18
[1937–2010].
Had Newton shed the trappings of this ancient mode of exposition and instead
employed some symbol (any symbol!) in place of the words “ultimately have the
ratio of equality”, his dense, paragraph-length proofs in the Principia might have
been reduced to a few succinct lines, and his mode of thought might still be widely
employed today. Both VCA and VDGF are attempts to demonstrate, very con-
cretely, the continuing relevance and vitality of Newton’s geometrical approach,
in areas of mathematics whose discovery lay a century in the future at the time of
his death in 1727.
Allow me to insert some fine print concerning my use of the words “rigour”
and “proof”. Yes, my occasional explicit use of Newtonian ultimate equalities in
this new edition represents a quantum jump in rigour, as compared to my original
exposition in VCA, but there will be some mathematicians who will object (with
justification!) that even this increase in rigour is insufficient, and that none of the
“proofs” in this work are worthy of that title, including the one just given: I did
not actually prove that the side of the triangle is ultimately equal to the arc of the
circle.
I can offer no logical defence, but will merely repeat the words I wrote in the
original Preface to VCA, 25 years ago: “... suppose one believes, as I do, that our
mathematical theories are attempting to capture aspects of a robust Platonic world
that is not of our making. I would then contend that an initial lack of rigour is a
small price to pay if it allows the reader to see into this world more directly and
18
See, for example, Arnol’d (1990).
Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition xix
pleasurably than would otherwise be possible.” So, to preemptively address my

critics, let me therefore concede, from the outset, that when I claim that an assertion
is “proved”, it may be read as, “proved beyond a reasonable doubt”!19
The Continued Relevance of the Unorthodox Contents of VCA

Leaving aside its unorthodox geometrical methods, VCA is also distinguished by
its unorthodox contents. The concept of the complex derivative (or amplitwist, as I
call it) is not even introduced until Chapter 4, and many of the most interesting,
unusual, and important parts of the book make little or no use of analysis.
For many decades before VCA, and now for decades after VCA, almost all20
introductions to Complex Analysis have seemed to follow almost exactly in the
footsteps of the ones that came before—the same topics, explained in the same
order, and in the same manner, like a single-file procession of monks through the
snow, quietly and sombrely intent on stepping into the footprints of the monk who
went before them: Do not disturb the pristine snow lying all about you! But when I
embarked upon VCA, 35 years ago, I was like a happily disobedient child, jumping
about wildly, rolling my whole mind in the snow!
I started from scratch, asking myself, which ideas connected to Complex Analysis
have become the most vital to modern mathematics and physics? A pair of closely related
answers to this question immediately presented themselves, and while I make no
claim to prescience, it is certainly true that the following have only become more
vital to mathematics and physics over the past 25 years:
• Hyperbolic Geometry violates the normal rules of Euclidean geometry, and it

is therefore also called Non-Euclidean Geometry. In the hyperbolic plane there are
infinitely many different lines through a given point that are parallel to a given
line, and the angles in a triangle always add up to less than π, the departure from
π being proportional to the area of the triangle.
Yet, as Poincaré was the first to recognize, this strange geometry arises naturally
across many parts of mathematics and physics. For example, the final figure of this
book reveals how hyperbolic geometry unifies all the methods of solving the two-
dimensional Dirichlet Problem. Furthermore, the visionary insights of Thurston21
19
Upon reading these words, a strongly supportive member of the Editorial Board of Princeton
University Press suggested to my editor that in place of “Q.E.D.”, I conclude each of my proofs in
VDGF with the letters, “P.B.R.D.”!
20
I freely admit that I have not undertaken a systematic study of all the Complex Analysis textbooks
that have been published during the last 25 years, and I am aware that there exist excellent exceptions to
the following generalization, my favourite ones being Shaw (2006) and Stewart and Tall (2018), which
I highly recommend precisely because of their very unusual contents. Incidentally, Shaw just happens
to have been a fellow student of Penrose!
21
For details of Thurston’s Geometrization Conjecture—now Theorem!—see Thurston (1997).
xx Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
(1946–2012)—subsequently vindicated by Perelman in 2003, six years after the pub-

lication of VCA—have established that hyperbolic geometry is in some sense more
fundamental than Euclidean geometry.
This fascinating and important geometry is intimately entwined with the complex
numbers, via the Möbius transformations that we shall discuss next. Yet, after a
quarter century, VCA’s long Chapter 6 remains the most complete and the most
geometrical treatment of hyperbolic geometry that I have seen in any introduction
to Complex Analysis.
• Möbius Transformations are mappings of the form

az + b
z ÞÑ M(z) = ,
cz + d
where a, b, c, d are complex constants. Whereas hyperbolic geometry is rarely
even mentioned in introductory texts on Complex Analysis, these transforma-
tions are discussed in all of them, but usually in a perfunctory and superficial
manner. In stark contrast, my long Chapter 3 remains the most complete and
the most geometrical treatment of these transformations that I have seen in any
introductory text.
The reason I lavished such extravagant attention upon these deceptively sim-
ple transformations is that they are possessed of magical powers, manifesting
themselves in multifaceted guises across mathematics and physics. Again, it was
Poincaré who was the first to recognize this. They are the isometries of both the two-
dimensional hyperbolic plane (introduced above) and of three-dimensional hyper-
bolic space; they are the famous Lorentz transformations (isometries) of Minkowski
and Einstein’s four-dimensional spacetime; and when the constants are all integers,
and ad − bc = 1, they form the modular group, describing the symmetries of the
modular functions so important in modern number theory; and the list goes on . . .
The second pair of innovations with respect to the contents of VCA is centred
on the use of vector fields as an alternative means of visualizing complex mappings.
Instead of picturing a point z in C as being mapped to another point w = f(z)
in another copy of C—which is the paradigm in force throughout the first nine
chapters—we instead picture f(z) as a vector emanating from z.
• The Topology of Vector Fields is the subject of Chapter 10. Here we shed
new light on the vital topological concept of the winding number (the subject
of Chapter 7) by instead viewing it through the prism of the index of a singular
point of a vector field. The climax of the topological analysis is a proof of the
glorious Poincaré–Hopf Theorem, (10.4), which relates the indices of a flow on a
closed surface to the surface’s topological genus, which counts how many holes
the surface has.
Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition xxi
So far as I can tell, my final22 major innovative topic in VCA has still not had the
impact I believe it deserves, despite my best efforts, and despite the even earlier,
independent efforts of its first principal champion, Professor Bart Braden, who
should also be credited23 with having named the concept in honour of its first
proponent:
• The Pólya Vector Field of a complex mapping z ÞÑ f(z) was introduced by

George Pólya (1887–1985) in his 1974 textbook with Gordon Latta, (Pólya and
Latta, 1974), and it is the subject of VCA’s Chapter 11: At each point z in C
we draw a vector P(z) that is defined to be the complex conjugate of f(z), so
P(z) ≡ f(z). This Pólya vector field then provides a wonderfully vivid means of
visualizing the real and imaginary parts of the integral24 of f(z) along a directed
path (aka a contour) C connecting two points in C, namely, (11.1) on page 549:
Z
f(z) dz = [flow of P along C] + i [flow of P across C] .
C
Here, the imaginary flux component is positive if P flows across C from our left to our
right as we face forward in the direction of travel along C.
Next, it follows immediately from the Cauchy–Riemann equations, (4.7), that
there is a wonderfully vivid physical interpretation of the existence of the complex
derivative (what I call the amplitwist), namely,
If and only if the amplitwist f ′ (z) exists, then the Pólya vector
field P(z) ≡ f(z) is divergence-free and curl-free.
This in turn immediately provides a marvellously physical explanation of one the
central results of Complex Analysis, namely, Cauchy’s Theorem, (8.20), the simplest
version of which states that
If the amplitwist f ′ exists everywhere on and inside a simple
H
closed loop L, then f(z)dz = 0.
L
But if L contains a singularity of f(z), then the integral need not vanish. An example
of central importance is f(z) = (1/z), for which the Pólya vector field is the radial
outward flow from a source at the origin. Choosing L to be an origin-centred circle
22
In fact there are many other innovations scattered across the work, most notably my introduction
of a concept I christened the complex curvature, which I apply to central force fields in Chapter 5, and
to the geometry of harmonic functions in Chapter 12; there’s also the Topological Argument Principle in
Chapter 7, and more besides, but I cannot attempt to catalogue all these ideas and discoveries here.
Some of the observations in Chapter 12 were previously published in Needham (1994), which won the
MAA’s Carl B. Allendoerfer Award in 1995.
23
See Braden (1985), Braden (1987)—which won the MAA’s Carl B. Allendoerfer Award in 1988—and
Braden (1991).
24
Rest assured that the following ideas will all be explained ab initio in the main text; this section
of the Preface is addressed to experienced readers who are already familiar with the fundamentals of
standard Complex Analysis.
xxii Preface to the 25th Anniversary Edition
K of radius r, traced counterclockwise, we obtain an immediate visual and physical

explanation of the iconic fact that
I
1
dz = 2πi.
K z
For clearly there is no flow along K, and since P(z) = (1/z) flows orthogonally
across K (from left to right) with speed (1/r), its flux across K is (2πr)(1/r) = 2π.
Furthermore, this physical interpretation explains why the value of the integral will
remain 2πi if K is continuously deformed into a general loop encircling the source
at the origin, so long as K does not cross that point as it is deformed.
Lastly, the ability of modern computers to quickly and easily draw the Pólya
vector field of any explicit formula for f(z) makes the concept all the more powerful
as a means of visualizing Complex Analysis.
While the evangelical work of VCA (and of Braden’s earlier papers) failed to
have its desired effect in the 20th century, my fervent hope now is that by explic-
itly singling out this concept for praise in this new Preface, more people may take
notice of it, and the gospel of the Pólya vector field may thereby be spread amongst
multitudes of new believers in the 21st century!
The Quiet Revolution

In hindsight, something was clearly in the air. No sooner had VCA been published
than I began to notice the emergence of a wave of kindred works that likewise
challenged the prevailing dominance of an arid, purely formal approach to math-
ematics, and that instead embraced intuitive explanations, the meaning of results,
and, crucially, the revelatory power of geometry.
It appeared that I had unwittingly been enlisted into a resistance movement
of sorts, one in which cell members were not permitted to know each others
identities—perhaps for their own safety?! But, unlike Bourbaki, this quiet revo-
lution had no name and no leaders; it was, to coin a phrase, “By the people, for
the people.” Long may this healthy embrace of meaning, intuition, and geometry
continue!
Cheers!
I raise my glass to the next 25 years!
T. N.
Mill Valley, California
June, 2022
PREFACE
Theories of the known, which are described by different physical ideas, may be equivalent
in all their predictions and hence scientifically indistinguishable. However, they are not
psychologically identical when trying to move from that base into the unknown. For differ-
ent views suggest different kinds of modifications which might be made and hence are not
equivalent in the hypotheses one generates from them in one’s attempt to understand what
is not yet understood.
Feynman (1966)
A Parable
Imagine a society in which the citizens are encouraged, indeed compelled up to
a certain age, to read (and sometimes write) musical scores. All quite admirable.
However, this society also has a very curious—few remember how it all started—
and disturbing law: Music must never be listened to or performed!
Though its importance is universally acknowledged, for some reason music is
not widely appreciated in this society. To be sure, professors still excitedly pore
over the great works of Bach, Wagner, and the rest, and they do their utmost to
communicate to their students the beautiful meaning of what they find there, but
they still become tongue-tied when brashly asked the question, “What’s the point
of all this?!”
In this parable, it was patently unfair and irrational to have a law forbid-
ding would-be music students from experiencing and understanding the subject
directly through “sonic intuition.” But in our society of mathematicians we have
such a law. It is not a written law, and those who flout it may yet prosper, but it
says, Mathematics must not be visualized!
More likely than not, when one opens a random modern mathematics text on a
random subject, one is confronted by abstract symbolic reasoning that is divorced
from one’s sensory experience of the world, despite the fact that the very phenom-
ena one is studying were often discovered by appealing to geometric (and perhaps
physical) intuition.
This reflects the fact that steadily over the last hundred years the honour of
visual reasoning in mathematics has been besmirched. Although the great mathe-
maticians have always been oblivious to such fashions, it is only recently that the
“mathematician in the street” has picked up the gauntlet on behalf of geometry.
xxiv Preface
The present book openly challenges the current dominance of purely symbolic
logical reasoning by using new, visually accessible arguments to explain the truths
of elementary complex analysis.
Computers
In part, the resurgence of interest in geometry can be traced to the mass-availability
of computers to draw mathematical objects, and perhaps also to the related, some-
what breathless, popular interest in chaos theory and in fractals. This book instead
advocates the more sober use of computers as an aid to geometric reasoning.
I have tried to encourage the reader to think of the computer as a physicist would
his laboratory—it may be used to check existing ideas about the construction of
the world, or as a tool for discovering new phenomena which then demand new
ideas for their explanation. Throughout the text I have suggested such uses of the
computer, but I have deliberately avoided giving detailed instructions. The reason
is simple: whereas a mathematical idea is a timeless thing, few things are more
ephemeral than computer hardware and software.
Having said this, the program “f(z)” is currently25 the best tool for visually
exploring the ideas in this book; a free demonstration version can be downloaded
directly from Lascaux Graphics. On occasion it would also be helpful if one had
access to an all-purpose mathematical engine such as Maple or Mathematica. How-
ever, I would like to stress that none of the above software is essential: the entire
book can be fully understood without any use of a computer.
Finally, some readers may be interested in knowing how computers were used
to produce this book. Perhaps five of the 501 diagrams were drawn using output
from Mathematica; the remainder I drew by hand (or rather “by mouse”) using
CorelDRAW, occasionally guided by output from “f(z)”. I typeset the book in LATEX
using the wonderful Y&Y TEX System for Windows26 , the figures being included as
EPS files. The text is Times27 , with Helvetica heads, and the mathematics is princi-
pally MathTime, though nine other mathematical fonts make cameo appearances.
All of these Adobe Type 1 fonts were obtained from Y&Y, Inc., with the exception
of Adobe’s MathematicalPi-Six font, which I used to represent quaternions. Finally,
OUP printed the book directly from my PostScript file.
The Book’s Newtonian Genesis

It is fairly well known that Newton’s original 1665 version of the calculus was dif-
ferent from the one we learn today: its essence was the manipulation of power
25
Sadly, this no longer exists.
26
Sadly, this no longer exists.
27
In this new edition, the headings are Optima, the text is Palatino, and the mathematics is Euler.
Preface xxv
series, which Newton likened to the manipulation of decimal expansions in arith-

metic. The symbolic calculus—the one in every standard textbook, and the one now
associated with the name of Leibniz—was also perfectly familiar to Newton, but
apparently it was of only incidental interest to him. After all, armed with his power
R 2 R
series, Newton could evaluate an integral like e−x dx just as easily as sinx dx.
Let Leibniz try that!
It is less well known that around 1680 Newton became disenchanted with both
these approaches, whereupon he proceeded to develop a third version of calcu-
lus, based on geometry. This “geometric calculus” is the mathematical engine that
propels the brilliant physics of Newton’s Principia.
Having grasped Newton’s method, I immediately tried my own hand at using it
to simplify my teaching of introductory calculus. An example will help to explain
what I mean by this. Let us show that if T = tan θ, then dT 2
dθ = 1 + T . If we increase
θ by a small amount dθ then T will increase by the amount dT in the figure below.
To obtain the result, we need only observe that in the limit as dθ tends to zero, the
black triangle is ultimately similar [exercise] to the shaded triangle. Thus, in this
limit,
dT L dT
= =⇒ = L2 = 1 + T 2 .
L dθ 1 dθ
Only gradually did I come to realize how naturally this mode of thought could be
applied—almost exactly 300 years later!—to the geometry of the complex plane.
Reading This Book

In the hope of making the book fun to read, I have attempted to write as though
I were explaining the ideas directly to a friend. Correspondingly, I have tried
to make you, the reader, into an active participant in developing the ideas. For
example, as an argument progresses, I have frequently and deliberately placed a
pair of logical stepping stones sufficiently far apart that you may need to pause
xxvi Preface
and stretch slightly to pass from one to the next. Such places are marked “[exer-
cise]”; they often require nothing more than a simple calculation or a moment of
reflection.
This brings me to the exercises proper, which may be found at the end of each
chapter. In the belief that the essential prerequisite for finding the answer to a
question is the desire to find it, I have made every effort to provide exercises that
provoke curiosity. They are considerably more wide-ranging than is common, and
they often establish important facts which are then used freely in the text itself.
While problems whose be all and end all is routine calculation are thereby avoided,
I believe that readers will automatically develop considerable computational skill
in the process of seeking solutions to these problems. On the other hand, my inten-
tion in a large number of the exercises is to illustrate how geometric thinking can
often replace lengthy calculation.
Any part of the book marked with a star (“*”) may be omitted on a first read-
ing. If you do elect to read a starred section, you may in turn choose to omit any
starred subsections. Please note, however, that a part of the book that is starred is
not necessarily any more difficult, nor any less interesting or important, than any
other part of the book.
Teaching from this Book

The entire book can probably be covered in a year, but in a single semester course
one must first decide what kind of course to teach, then choose a corresponding
path through the book. Here I offer just three such possible paths:
• Traditional Course. Chapters 1 to 9, omitting all starred material (e.g., the whole
of Chapter 6).
• Vector Field Course. In order to take advantage of the Pólya vector field
approach to visualizing complex integrals, one could follow the “Tradi-
tional Course” above, omitting Chapter 9, and adding the unstarred parts of
Chapters 10 and 11.
• Non-Euclidean Course. At the expense of teaching any integration, one could
give a course focused on Möbius transformations and non-Euclidean geometry.
These two related parts of complex analysis are probably the most important
ones for contemporary mathematics and physics, and yet they are also the ones
that are almost entirely neglected in undergraduate-level texts. On the other
hand, graduate-level works tend to assume that you have already encountered
the main ideas as an undergraduate: Catch 22!
Such a course might go as follows: All of Chapter 1; the unstarred parts of

Chapter 2; all of Chapter 3, including the starred sections but (possibly) omitting
Preface xxvii
the starred subsections; all of Chapter 4; all of Chapter 6, including the starred
sections but (possibly) omitting the starred subsections.
Omissions and Apologies

If one believes in the ultimate unity of mathematics and physics, as I do, then a
very strong case for the necessity of complex numbers can be built on their appar-
ently fundamental role in the quantum mechanical laws governing matter. Also, the
work of Sir Roger Penrose has shown (with increasing force) that complex numbers
play an equally central role in the relativistic laws governing the structure of space-
time. Indeed, if the laws of matter and of spacetime are ever to be reconciled, then it
seems very likely that it will be through the auspices of the complex numbers. This
book cannot explore these matters; instead, we refer the interested reader to Feyn-
man (1963, Vol. III), Feynman (1985), Penrose and Rindler (1984), and especially
Penrose (2005).
A more serious omission is the lack of discussion of Riemann surfaces, which I
had originally intended to treat in a final chapter. This plan was aborted once it
became clear that a serious treatment would entail expanding the book beyond
reason. By this time, however, I had already erected much of the necessary scaf-
folding, and this material remains in the finished book. In particular, I hope that
the interested reader will find the last three chapters helpful in understanding Rie-
mann’s original physical insights, as expounded by Klein (1881). See also Springer
(1981, Ch. 1), which essentially reproduces Klein’s monograph, but with additional
helpful commentary.
I consider the history of mathematics to be a vital tool in understanding both the
current state of mathematics, and its trajectory into the future. Sadly, however, I can
do no more than touch on historical matters in the present work; instead I refer you
to the remarkable book, Mathematics and Its History, by John Stillwell (2010). Indeed,
I strongly encourage you to think of his book as a companion to mine: not only does
it trace and explain the development of complex analysis, but it also explores and
illuminates the connections with other areas of mathematics.
To the expert reader I would like to apologize for having invented the word
“amplitwist” [Chapter 4] as a synonym (more or less) for “derivative”, as well the
component terms “amplification” and “twist”. I can only say that the need for some
such terminology was forced on me in the classroom: if you try teaching the ideas
in this book without using such language, I think you will quickly discover what
I mean! Incidentally, a precedence argument in defence of “amplitwist” might be
that a similar term was coined by the older German school of Klein, Bieberbach,
et al. They spoke of “eine Drehstreckung”, from “drehen” (to twist) and “strecken”
(to stretch).
xxviii Preface
A significant proportion of the geometric observations and arguments contained

in this book are, to the best of my knowledge, new. I have not drawn attention to
this in the text itself as this would have served no useful purpose: students don’t
need to know, and experts will know without being told. However, in cases where
an idea is clearly unusual but I am aware of it having been published by someone
else, I have tried to give credit where credit is due.
In attempting to rethink so much classical mathematics, I have no doubt made
mistakes; the blame for these is mine alone. Corrections will be gratefully received
at VCA.correction@gmail.com.
My book will no doubt be flawed in many ways of which I am not yet aware,
but there is one “sin” that I have intentionally committed, and for which I shall
not repent: many of the arguments are not rigorous, at least as they stand. This is
a serious crime if one believes that our mathematical theories are merely elaborate
mental constructs, precariously hoisted aloft. Then rigour becomes the nerve-
racking balancing act that prevents the entire structure from crashing down around
us. But suppose one believes, as I do, that our mathematical theories are attempt-
ing to capture aspects of a robust Platonic world that is not of our making. I would
then contend that an initial lack of rigour is a small price to pay if it allows the
reader to see into this world more directly and pleasurably than would otherwise
be possible.
T. N.
San Francisco, California
June, 1996
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost I wish to express my indebtedness to Dr. Stanley Nel. He is my

friend, my colleague, and my Dean, and in all three of these capacities he has helped
me to complete this book. As a friend he offered support when progress was slow
and my spirits were low; as a mathematical colleague he read much of the book
and offered helpful criticisms; as Dean he granted me a succession of increasingly
powerful computers, and when the US Immigration Service sought to have my
position filled by an “equally qualified” American, he successfully fought them on
my behalf. For all this, and much else besides, I offer him my deep gratitude.
Next I would like to thank Prof. John Stillwell of Monash University. The great
value I place on his writings should be clear from the frequency with which I refer
to them in the pages that follow. Also, though I lack his gift for conciseness, I have
sought to emulate elements of his approach in an attempt to give back meaning
to mathematical concepts. Finally, my greatest and most concrete debt arises from
the fact that he read each draft chapter as it was written, and this despite the fact
that we had never even met! The book owes a great deal to his numerous helpful
suggestions and corrections.
I consider myself very fortunate that the mathematics department here at the
University of San Francisco is completely free of political intrigue, rivalry, and other
assorted academic blights. I am grateful to all my colleagues for creating such a
friendly and supportive atmosphere in which to work. In particular, however, I
should like to single out the following people for thanks:
• Nancy Campagna for her diligent proof-reading of half the book;

• Allan Cruse and Millianne Lehmann, not only for granting all my software
requests during their respective tenures as Department Chair, but also for all
their kind and sage advice since my arrival in the United States;
• James Finch for his patience and expertise in helping me overcome various
problems associated with my typesetting of the book in LATEX;
• Robert Wolf for having built up a superb mathematics collection in our library;
• Paul Zeitz for his great faith in me and in the value of what I was trying to
accomplish, for his concrete suggestions and corrections, and for his courage
in being the first person (other than myself) to teach complex analysis using
chapters of the book.
xxx Acknowledgements
Prof. Gerald Alexanderson of Santa Clara University has my sincere thanks for the
encouragement he offered me upon reading some of the earliest chapters, as well
as for his many subsequent acts of kindness.
I will always be grateful for the education I received at Merton College, Oxford.
It is therefore especially pleasing and fitting to have this book published by OUP,
and I would particularly like to thank Dr. Martin Gilchrist, the former Senior Math-
ematics Editor, for his enthusiastic encouragement when I first approached him
with the idea of the book.
When I first arrived at USF from England in 1989 I had barely seen a com-
puter. The fact that OUP printed this book directly from my Internet-transmitted
PostScript files is an indication of how far I have come since then. I owe all this
to James Kabage. A mere graduate student at the time we met, Jim quickly rose
through the ranks to become Director of Network Services. Despite this fact, he
never hesitated to spend hours with me in my office resolving my latest hardware or
software crisis. He always took the extra time to clearly explain to me the reasoning
leading to his solution, and in this way I became his student.
I also thank Dr. Benjamin Baab, the Executive Director of Information Technol-
ogy Services at USF. Despite his lofty position, he too was always willing to roll up
his sleeves in order to help me resolve my latest Microsoft conundrum.
Eric Scheide (our multitalented Webmaster) has my sincere gratitude for writing
an extremely nifty Perl program that greatly speeded my creation of the index.
I thank Prof. Berthold Horn of MIT for creating the magnificent Y&Y TEX System
for Windows28 , for his generous help with assorted TEXnical problems, and for his
willingness to adopt my few suggestions for improving what I consider to be the
Mercedes-Benz of the TEX world.
Similarly, I thank Martin Lapidus of Lascaux Graphics for incorporating many
of my suggestions into his “f(z)”29 program, thereby making it into an even better
tool for doing “visual complex analysis”.
This new printing of the book incorporates a great many corrections. Most of
these were reported by readers, and I very much appreciate their efforts. While I
cannot thank each one of these readers by name, I must acknowledge Dr. R. von
Randow for single-handedly having reported more than 30 errors.
As a student of Roger Penrose I had the privilege of watching him think out loud
by means of his beautiful blackboard drawings. In the process, I became convinced
that if only one tried hard enough—or were clever enough!—every mathemati-
cal mystery could be resolved through geometric reasoning. George Burnett-Stuart
and I became firm friends while students of Penrose. In the course of our endless
discussions of music, physics, and mathematics, George helped me to refine both
28
While Y & Y no longer exists, my gratitude lives on.
29
While “f(z)” no longer exists, my gratitude lives on.
Acknowledgements xxxi
my conception of the nature of mathematics, and of what constitutes an acceptable

explanation within that subject. My dedication of this book to these two friends
scarcely repays the great debt I owe them.
The care of several friends helped me to cope with depression following the
death of my beloved mother Claudia. In addition to my brother Guy and my father
Rodney, I wish to express my appreciation to Peter and Ginny Pacheco, and to Amy
Miller. I don’t know what I would have done without their healing affection.
Lastly, I thank my dearest wife Mary. During the writing of this book she allowed
me to pretend that science was the most important thing in life; now that the book
is over, she is my daily proof that there is something even more important.
CONTENTS
1 Geometry and Complex Arithmetic 1

1.1 Introduction 1
1.1.1 Historical Sketch 1
1.1.2 Bombelli’s “Wild Thought” 4
1.1.3 Some Terminology and Notation 6
1.1.4 Practice 8
1.1.5 Equivalence of Symbolic and Geometric
Arithmetic 8
1.2 Euler’s Formula 11
1.2.1 Introduction 11
1.2.2 Moving Particle Argument 12
1.2.3 Power Series Argument 13
1.2.4 Sine and Cosine in Terms of Euler’s Formula 15
1.3 Some Applications 16
1.3.2 Trigonometry 16
1.3.3 Geometry 18
1.3.4 Calculus 22
1.3.5 Algebra 25
1.3.6 Vectorial Operations 30
1.4 Transformations and Euclidean Geometry* 33
1.4.1 Geometry Through the Eyes of Felix Klein 33
1.4.2 Classifying Motions 38
1.4.3 Three Reflections Theorem 41
1.4.4 Similarities and Complex Arithmetic 44
1.4.5 Spatial Complex Numbers? 48
1.5 Exercises 51
2 Complex Functions as Transformations 61

2.1 Introduction 61
2.2 Polynomials 64
2.2.1 Positive Integer Powers 64
xxxiv Contents
2.2.2 Cubics Revisited* 66

2.2.3 Cassinian Curves* 67
2.3 Power Series 71
2.3.1 The Mystery of Real Power Series 71
2.3.2 The Disc of Convergence 75
2.3.3 Approximating a Power Series with a
Polynomial 78
2.3.4 Uniqueness 79
2.3.5 Manipulating Power Series 81
2.3.6 Finding the Radius of Convergence 83
2.3.7 Fourier Series* 86
2.4 The Exponential Function 88
2.4.1 Power Series Approach 88
2.4.2 The Geometry of the Mapping 89
2.4.3 Another Approach 90
2.5 Cosine and Sine 94
2.5.1 Definitions and Identities 94
2.5.2 Relation to Hyperbolic Functions 95
2.5.3 The Geometry of the Mapping 97
2.6 Multifunctions 100
2.6.1 Example: Fractional Powers 100
2.6.2 Single-Valued Branches of a Multifunction 103
2.6.3 Relevance to Power Series 106
2.6.4 An Example with Two Branch Points 108
2.7 The Logarithm Function 110
2.7.1 Inverse of the Exponential Function 110
2.7.2 The Logarithmic Power Series 112
2.7.3 General Powers 113
2.8 Averaging over Circles* 115
2.8.1 The Centroid 115
2.8.2 Averaging over Regular Polygons 118
2.8.3 Averaging over Circles 121
2.9 Exercises 125
3 Möbius Transformations and Inversion 137

3.1 Introduction 137
3.1.1 Definition and Significance of Möbius
Transformations 137
Contents xxxv
3.1.2 The Connection with Einstein’s Theory of

Relativity* 138
3.1.3 Decomposition into Simple Transformations 139
3.2 Inversion 139
3.2.1 Preliminary Definitions and Facts 139
3.2.2 Preservation of Circles 142
3.2.3 Constructing Inverse Points Using Orthogonal
Circles 144
3.2.4 Preservation of Angles 147
3.2.5 Preservation of Symmetry 149
3.2.6 Inversion in a Sphere 150
3.3 Three Illustrative Applications of Inversion 153
3.3.1 A Problem on Touching Circles 153
3.3.2 A Curious Property of Quadrilaterals with
Orthogonal Diagonals 154
3.3.3 Ptolemy’s Theorem 156
3.4 The Riemann Sphere 157
3.4.1 The Point at Infinity 157
3.4.2 Stereographic Projection 158
3.4.3 Transferring Complex Functions to the Sphere 162
3.4.4 Behaviour of Functions at Infinity 163
3.4.5 Stereographic Formulae* 165
3.5 Möbius Transformations: Basic Results 168
3.5.1 Preservation of Circles, Angles, and Symmetry 168
3.5.2 Non-Uniqueness of the Coefficients 169
3.5.3 The Group Property 170
3.5.4 Fixed Points 171
3.5.5 Fixed Points at Infinity 172
3.5.6 The Cross-Ratio 174
3.6 Möbius Transformations as Matrices* 177
3.6.1 Empirical Evidence of a Link with Linear
Algebra 177
3.6.2 The Explanation: Homogeneous Coordinates 178
3.6.3 Eigenvectors and Eigenvalues* 180
3.6.4 Rotations of the Sphere as Möbius
Transformations* 182
3.7 Visualization and Classification* 184
3.7.1 The Main Idea 184
xxxvi Contents
3.7.2 Elliptic, Hyperbolic, and Loxodromic

Transformations 186
3.7.3 Local Geometric Interpretation of the Multiplier 189
3.7.4 Parabolic Transformations 190
3.7.5 Computing the Multiplier* 191
3.7.6 Eigenvalue Interpretation of the Multiplier* 192
3.8 Decomposition into 2 or 4 Reflections* 194
3.8.2 Elliptic Case 194
3.8.3 Hyperbolic Case 196
3.8.4 Parabolic Case 197
3.8.5 Summary 198
3.9 Automorphisms of the Unit Disc* 199
3.9.1 Counting Degrees of Freedom 199
3.9.2 Finding the Formula via the Symmetry Principle 200
3.9.3 Interpreting the Simplest Formula
Geometrically* 201
3.9.4 Introduction to Riemann’s Mapping Theorem 204
3.10 Exercises 205
4 Differentiation: The Amplitwist Concept 213

4.2 A Puzzling Phenomenon 213
4.3 Local Description of Mappings in the Plane 216
4.3.2 The Jacobian Matrix 217
4.3.3 The Amplitwist Concept 218
4.4 The Complex Derivative as Amplitwist 220
4.4.1 The Real Derivative Re-examined 220
4.4.2 The Complex Derivative 221
4.4.3 Analytic Functions 223
4.4.4 A Brief Summary 224
4.5 Some Simple Examples 225
4.6 Conformal = Analytic 227
4.6.2 Conformality Throughout a Region 228
4.6.3 Conformality and the Riemann Sphere 230
4.7 Critical Points 231
4.7.1 Degrees of Crushing 231
Contents xxxvii
4.7.2 Breakdown of Conformality 232

4.7.3 Branch Points 233
4.8 The Cauchy–Riemann Equations 234
4.8.2 The Geometry of Linear Transformations 235
4.8.3 The Cauchy–Riemann Equations 237
4.9 Exercises 239
5 Further Geometry of Differentiation 245

5.1 Cauchy–Riemann Revealed 245
5.1.2 The Cartesian Form 245
5.1.3 The Polar Form 247
5.2 An Intimation of Rigidity 249
5.3 Visual Differentiation of log(z) 252
5.4 Rules of Differentiation 254
5.4.1 Composition 254
5.4.2 Inverse Functions 255
5.4.3 Addition and Multiplication 256
5.5 Polynomials, Power Series, and Rational Functions 257
5.5.1 Polynomials 257
5.5.2 Power Series 257
5.5.3 Rational Functions 259
5.6 Visual Differentiation of the Power Function 260
5.7 Visual Differentiation of exp(z) 262
′
5.8 Geometric Solution of E = E 264
5.9 An Application of Higher Derivatives: Curvature* 266
5.9.2 Analytic Transformation of Curvature 267
5.9.3 Complex Curvature 270
5.10 Celestial Mechanics* 274
5.10.1 Central Force Fields 274
5.10.2 Two Kinds of Elliptical Orbit 274
5.10.3 Changing the First into the Second 277
5.10.4 The Geometry of Force 278
5.10.5 An Explanation 279
5.10.6 The Kasner–Arnol’d Theorem 280
xxxviii Contents
5.11 Analytic Continuation* 281

5.11.2 Rigidity 283
5.11.3 Uniqueness 284
5.11.4 Preservation of Identities 286
5.11.5 Analytic Continuation via Reflections 286
5.12 Exercises 293
6 Non-Euclidean Geometry* 303

6.1.1 The Parallel Axiom 303
6.1.2 Some Facts from Non-Euclidean Geometry 305
6.1.3 Geometry on a Curved Surface 307
6.1.4 Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Geometry 309
6.1.5 Gaussian Curvature 311
6.1.6 Surfaces of Constant Curvature 313
6.1.7 The Connection with Möbius Transformations 315
6.2 Spherical Geometry 316
6.2.1 The Angular Excess of a Spherical Triangle 316
6.2.2 Motions of the Sphere: Spatial Rotations and
Reflections 317
6.2.3 A Conformal Map of the Sphere 321
6.2.4 Spatial Rotations as Möbius Transformations 325
6.2.5 Spatial Rotations and Quaternions 329
6.3 Hyperbolic Geometry 333
6.3.1 The Tractrix and the Pseudosphere 333
6.3.2 The Constant Negative Curvature of the
Pseudosphere* 335
6.3.3 A Conformal Map of the Pseudosphere 336
6.3.4 Beltrami’s Hyperbolic Plane 339
6.3.5 Hyperbolic Lines and Reflections 342
6.3.6 The Bolyai–Lobachevsky Formula* 347
6.3.7 The Three Types of Direct Motion 348
6.3.8 Decomposing an Arbitrary Direct Motion into
Two Reflections 353
6.3.9 The Angular Excess of a Hyperbolic Triangle 357
6.3.10 The Beltrami–Poincaré Disc 359
6.3.11 Motions of the Beltrami–Poincaré Disc 363
6.3.12 The Hemisphere Model and Hyperbolic Space 367
6.4 Exercises 374
Contents xxxix
7 Winding Numbers and Topology 385

7.1 Winding Number 385
7.1.1 The Definition 385
7.1.2 What Does “Inside” Mean? 386
7.1.3 Finding Winding Numbers Quickly 387
7.2 Hopf’s Degree Theorem 388
7.2.1 The Result 388
7.2.2 Loops as Mappings of the Circle* 390
7.2.3 The Explanation* 391
7.3 Polynomials and the Argument Principle 393
7.4 A Topological Argument Principle* 394
7.4.1 Counting Preimages Algebraically 394
7.4.2 Counting Preimages Geometrically 396
7.4.3 What’s Topologically Special About Analytic
Functions? 398
7.4.4 A Topological Argument Principle 399
7.4.5 Two Examples 401
7.5 Rouché’s Theorem 403
7.5.2 The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra 404
7.5.3 Brouwer’s Fixed Point Theorem* 404
7.6 Maxima and Minima 405
7.6.1 Maximum-Modulus Theorem 405
7.6.2 Related Results 407
7.7 The Schwarz–Pick Lemma* 407
7.7.1 Schwarz’s Lemma 407
7.7.2 Liouville’s Theorem 409
7.7.3 Pick’s Result 411
7.8 The Generalized Argument Principle 414
7.8.1 Rational Functions 414
7.8.2 Poles and Essential Singularities 416
7.8.3 The Explanation* 419
7.9 Exercises 420
8 Complex Integration: Cauchy’s Theorem 429

8.2 The Real Integral 430
8.2.1 The Riemann Sum 430
xl Contents
8.2.2 The Trapezoidal Rule 432

8.2.3 Geometric Estimation of Errors 434
8.3 The Complex Integral 436
8.3.1 Complex Riemann Sums 436
8.3.2 A Visual Technique 439
8.3.3 A Useful Inequality 440
8.3.4 Rules of Integration 441
8.4 Complex Inversion 442
8.4.1 A Circular Arc 442
8.4.2 General Loops 444
8.4.3 Winding Number 446
8.5 Conjugation 447
8.5.2 Area Interpretation 448
8.5.3 General Loops 450
8.6 Power Functions 450
8.6.1 Integration along a Circular Arc 450
8.6.2 Complex Inversion as a Limiting Case* 452
8.6.3 General Contours and the Deformation
Theorem 453
8.6.4 A Further Extension of the Theorem 454
8.6.5 Residues 455
8.7 The Exponential Mapping 457
8.8 The Fundamental Theorem 458
8.8.2 An Example 459
8.8.3 The Fundamental Theorem 460
8.8.4 The Integral as Antiderivative 462
8.8.5 Logarithm as Integral 465
8.9 Parametric Evaluation 466
8.10 Cauchy’s Theorem 467
8.10.1 Some Preliminaries 467
8.10.2 The Explanation 469
8.11 The General Cauchy Theorem 472
8.11.2 The Explanation 473
8.11.3 A Simpler Explanation 474
Contents xli
8.12 The General Formula of Contour Integration 475

8.13 Exercises 478
9 Cauchy’s Formula and Its Applications 485

9.1 Cauchy’s Formula 485
9.1.2 First Explanation 486
9.1.3 Gauss’s Mean Value Theorem 487
9.1.4 A Second Explanation and the General
Cauchy Formula 488
9.2 Infinite Differentiability and Taylor Series 489
9.2.1 Infinite Differentiability 489
9.2.2 Taylor Series 491
9.3 Calculus of Residues 493
9.3.1 Laurent Series Centred at a Pole 493
9.3.2 A Formula for Calculating Residues 494
9.3.3 Application to Real Integrals 495
9.3.4 Calculating Residues using Taylor Series 497
9.3.5 Application to Summation of Series 498
9.4 Annular Laurent Series 501
9.4.2 Laurent’s Theorem 502
9.5 Exercises 506
10 Vector Fields: Physics and Topology 511

10.1 Vector Fields 511
10.1.1 Complex Functions as Vector Fields 511
10.1.2 Physical Vector Fields 513
10.1.3 Flows and Force Fields 515
10.1.4 Sources and Sinks 516
10.2 Winding Numbers and Vector Fields* 518
10.2.1 The Index of a Singular Point 518
10.2.2 The Index According to Poincaré 522
10.2.3 The Index Theorem 523
10.3 Flows on Closed Surfaces* 525
10.3.1 Formulation of the Poincaré–Hopf Theorem 525
10.3.2 Defining the Index on a Surface 527
10.3.3 An Explanation of the Poincaré–Hopf Theorem 529
10.4 Exercises 532
xlii Contents
11 Vector Fields and Complex Integration 537

11.1 Flux and Work 537
11.1.1 Flux 537
11.1.2 Work 539
11.1.3 Local Flux and Local Work 542
11.1.4 Divergence and Curl in Geometric Form* 543
11.1.5 Divergence-Free and Curl-Free Vector Fields 545
11.2 Complex Integration in Terms of Vector Fields 547
11.2.1 The Pólya Vector Field 547
11.2.2 Cauchy’s Theorem 549
11.2.3 Example: Area as Flux 550
11.2.4 Example: Winding Number as Flux 551
11.2.5 Local Behaviour of Vector Fields* 553
11.2.6 Cauchy’s Formula 555
11.2.7 Positive Powers 556
11.2.8 Negative Powers and Multipoles 557
11.2.9 Multipoles at Infinity 560
11.2.10 Laurent’s Series as a Multipole Expansion 561
11.3 The Complex Potential 562
11.3.2 The Stream Function 563
11.3.3 The Gradient Field 565
11.3.4 The Potential Function 567
11.3.5 The Complex Potential 569
11.3.6 Examples 572
11.4 Exercises 574
12 Flows and Harmonic Functions 577

12.1 Harmonic Duals 577
12.1.1 Dual Flows 577
12.1.2 Harmonic Duals 580
12.2 Conformal Invariance 583
12.2.1 Conformal Invariance of Harmonicity 583
12.2.2 Conformal Invariance of the Laplacian 584
12.2.3 The Meaning of the Laplacian 586
12.3 A Powerful Computational Tool 587
12.4 The Complex Curvature Revisited* 590
12.4.1 Some Geometry of Harmonic Equipotentials 590
12.4.2 The Curvature of Harmonic Equipotentials 590
Contents xliii
12.4.3 Further Complex Curvature Calculations 594

12.4.4 Further Geometry of the Complex Curvature 595
12.5 Flow Around an Obstacle 598
12.5.3 The Method of Images 604
12.5.4 Mapping One Flow Onto Another 611
12.6 The Physics of Riemann’s Mapping Theorem 613
12.6.2 Exterior Mappings and Flows Round
Obstacles 615
12.6.3 Interior Mappings and Dipoles 618
12.6.4 Interior Mappings, Vortices, and Sources 620
12.6.5 An Example: Automorphisms of the Disc 624
12.6.6 Green’s Function 626
12.7 Dirichlet’s Problem 630
12.7.2 Schwarz’s Interpretation 631
12.7.3 Dirichlet’s Problem for the Disc 634
12.7.4 The Interpretations of Neumann and Bôcher 637
12.7.5 Green’s General Formula 643
12.8 Exercises 649
Bibliography 653
Index 661
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
put him off by telling him I imagined the french were resolved to renew the
Expedition soon and so friends did not care to write least any discovery
should ensue, but could easily see that the Answer was not att all
satisfactory. I returned that same night to the Country, and during a few
days that I stayed, prepared for my journey.
N.B.—This is a fragment of a letter written by Mr. Murray to the
Pretender soon after the miscarriage of the French Expedition.
It was looked upon by some as certain,
and thought necessary by all, that Mr.
Watson[198] should come over, as he was the Murray to the
Chevalier
person who had gone through the whole
Highlands and gott the engagements of the Several Gentlemen
at his first leaving Scotland, and surely had any of them been
so little as to flinch from what they engaged to him, he was the
natural and indeed the only person that could have upbraided
them into their Duty. My Lord says he could trust to no
conveyance, and so could not soonner give us any information
your Majestys friend is here, upon Mr. D[rummond] not coming,
expected immediately after the Embargo was taken of in france
that some one or other would have been dispatched to our
Coasts with an account of what had passed, and what was to
be hoped for, that so we might have regulate our fortunes
Conduct accordingly. The neglect of this, Sir, greatly surprises
your Majestys friends in generall, and gives the Gentlemen in
the concert a good deal of Umbrage, as they thereby think
themselves slighted and neglected, whereas, they being the
first promoters of the whole scheme, they humbly think entitled
them to have the most expidetious information. His Lordship
next supposes that we are fully satisfied of the french sincerity,
which indeed is entirely otherwise, especially from the Reasons
he assigns that it was owing to the commandants neglect or
disobedience to his Instructions. We never can bring ourselves
to believe that any man (especially a french subject) grown old
with an untainted and great Reputation, durst have disobeyed
what seems to have been the only Material part of his
Instructions to block up Portsmouth, and surely, if not for this
one Errand his Voyage to the Chunnel must rather do harm
than good, which was evidently seen by the Government being
put timeously upon their Guard. As to his next paragraph
relating to the frenches cautious delay purposely to see what
Influence the powers of the Court would have upon your
Majestys friends here, and that the above cautious delay was
grating to the Prince; no wonder indeed his Royal Highness
had too penetrating an Eye not to see that it would be
impossible to recover this Time and opportunity he was losing.
But what really quite astonishes us is his Lordships saying that
from the light it was represented in, their caution seemed to be
well grounded. We cant pretend to take their Reasons to
[heart] as they are not told us, but we are affraid they consist
more in plausible pretences, dressed up with a little french
Rhetorick, than in strong and solid Arguments. We are in this
Climate generally accustomed to the plainer sort of speach,
and we cannot help thinking ourselves judges of it. Did not the
french Court know of Comns.?[199] Did they not know that that
Majority would pass all Bills that might seem their Master? Did
they not know that the repeal of the Habeas Corpus act would
naturally be the first step and that by that Repeal they were
enabled to take up every person they suspected? Did they not
know that the principal men in England, of your Majestys
friends, were in the house and that not one of them durst object
to any method that was proposed as their offering. Such would
have been an open declaration of their principles, and must
consequently have caused their confinement. Did they not
know that the English are a fickle sort of people, and that they
had a natural abhorence of the french nation, and thay could
not be ignorant that this was giving them time to frighten them
by the fear of a french Influence that State pretence and
thereby to make friends in the City of London. If they were
Ignorant of all these they ought surely to have been told, and
we must be of opinion that these as such Indisputable Reasons
that no Sound Arguments could be adduced to confute them,
which, when rightly observed, makes their Schemes of
delaying it for a little time appear vain and frivolous pretences
and absolutely contradictory to all Right Reason. We are
convinced that his Royal Highness, keeping so quiet has
effectually deceived the Government, that it is entirely owing to
his own matchless address, and indeed upon decyphering the
Letter My Lord T[ra]q[uai]r and I thought that we was in the
next line to have had orders to keep in readyness to favour a
discent to be made, upon the D[uke] of H[amilton] and the
Dutch troops going over; but to our unexpressible Surprise he
proposes new assurances to be given both from Scotland and
England. In the name of Wonder what can all this mean?
Where are the Grounds? Where the Reasons, where the
necessity leading to such a demand? The assurances from
Scotland were thought sufficient by the K[ing], by C[ardinal]
F[leury] and by Mr. Amalot. From the first moment the
assurances carried over by Mr. Butler last year from England
were thought sufficient, otherwise the french would not have
carried the Expidition so far. If this is the case (which we have
all along been made believe) what is the necessity for any
Renewal of them? What a horrid and Gloomy prospect must
such a Scheme carry along with it, things have been carried on
for some years with great Secrecy and caution, tho’ with
danger of Life and fortune to those concerned, and must they
now recommence such another tedious and dangerous
Negotiation? I am afraid, Sir, if your Majesty should find it
necessary it will be next to impossible, at lest my Lord
T[ra]q[uai]r never can take a hand doing any thing in England,
he is already strongly suspected and it wanted but little he was
not taken up some moneths ago. The express he sent to
London with a Letter to Watson[200] was seized, which was
occasioned by one from him which left us quite in the dark as
to what assistance we were to have, and that within 3 weeks of
the Expidition, but not till he had delivered his Packet; and had
he not luckyly said he believed it Related to a marriage which
was then the talk of the town, his Lordship had surely been
arested. But if the English are so well satisfied with the
procedure of the french, and the open discovery of any plot,
why cant they find one amongst themselves to do the
Business? I shall be sorry to think they have only a view to gain
time till they see whither they are able to carry on the War in
spite of Brittain, and then tell us that the Zeal shown for the
present Government in the time of the Expidition contradicts all
the assurances we advanced to the contrary, which will be the
Result of their Cautious and well delay for a little time. This is
harsh, but other people have seen, and I have read of france
doing the like in other cases. As to the troops to be landed in
Scotland, suppose it to be impossible to converse with all the
concert on it att any time in two moneths, and all present not to
be done at all, yett I can take upon me to affirm that they still
continue in the same mind as to every Article. 3000 men
landed, one half near Sir J[ames] Cam[pbe]ll to command
Argyle Shire, the other half near Inverness, a L[ochie]l may join
them to command the north, or if the one half can’t reach near
to Sir J[ames] C[ampbell], lett them be all landed together with
4 feild pieces, 15 or 20,000 Stand of Arms, Gones, Pistoles
and broad Swords, yett from the inquiry I have made I am
satisfied 10,000 Guns or less, 10,000 Broad Swords and as
many Pistoles will sufficiently do the Business, as all the Isles
are lately Armed with Guns and most of them Swords,
Likewise, as for the Inland Country, they want Swords and
Pistoles very much. It gives us great uneasiness that my Lord
M[arischal] should be so unhappy as to fly in the face of every
Scheme, if he himself does not project. Sed quos Deus vult
perdere dementit prius, but we cannot help thinking oddnt,
when the money was had to pay Sir J[ames] Mr. Watson did
not care to remit it. This to be sure required no Conveyance, a
Bill was sufficient. He knows the miserable Situation he is in,
and tho’ the rest of the Concert are in no such Indigent
Situation, yett their Circumstances are not so opulent as to
assist him. The Gentlemen in the Highlands were so desirous
to know if any accounts were come that Locheal gave a
Commission to St[ewart] of A[rdshiel] who came expressly to
meet with me and indeed I was so Anxious for the Situation of
your Majestys friends, that I resolved upon a journey abroad to
inform myself of every thing, upon the pretence of going to see
the Army to some who had a title to be a little more Curious
upon pretence of making more interest for a Company in the
Dutch in case of any new levies, so that it was an accident I
either mett with that Gentleman or saw my Lord S[emple] letter.
He complained heavily that we had no Accounts from abroad,
and indeed I never had more difficulty to excuse our friends.
However, I told that our having none looked well as it
portended that the expidition had surely suffered some short
delay from the bad weather that had happened at the time, and
as it was soon to be resumed, they thought it needless to send
us any information in case of discoveries, which nevertheless
cou’d observe did not entirely Satisfie him. My Lord T[raquair]
desired me to assure your Majesty that there is nothing he
would not undertake which might further your Majestys
interest but that he cannot come from his own house to
Edinburgh without being suspected, which renders it
impossible for him to negotiate any thing in England, and at the
same time desires me to observe that he cannot reconceal that
part of my Lord S[emple’s] Letter, where he tells him that
nothing will be fixed with relation to the expidition till he hear
from him with his proposals of fresh assurances from your
Majestys friends here. In short, Sir, I must say that this letter is
of such a nature that I do not take it upon me to intimate it to
the Gentlemen in the Concert as in the present Situation Your
Majestys Wisdom, the inexpressible Character the Prince has
acquired as being of so brave and enterprising a Spirit,
together with their own Suspence and hopes are what keep up
their Spirits, but was I to make it knowen to them I am afraid it
would throw them into a fatal Despondency, so till I have your
Majestys orders am resolved to keep it private. Never was
there a people more anxiously concerned about a princes
happiness and welfare than this nation when she heard of
Highness imbarkation, nor do I believe Scotland ever made a
more unanimous Appearance than they would have done then,
provided the Conditions promised them had been performed,
but we have been told here, how justly I won’t say, that there
was only 3000 Muskets designed for us without any troops,
indeed, we are able, at any time, to command our own Country
with Arms and officers, especially now when there is only four
Regiments of foot and two of Dragoons, and each of these 100
Men draughted to flanders. I am sorry to be obliged to trouble
your Majesty with so long a paper, but I am hopefull your
Majesty will be of opinion our present Situation required it
especially after receiving the inclosed, nor do I fear your
Majestys being angry upon that account as I most humbly beg
leave to say that an honest and loyal Subject can never explain
himself too fully and Clearly to a wise Prince, and since the
Receipt of Lord S[emple] letter I am more fully resolved to
make my journey abroad as I think there is more Reason for
full and pointed explications on every Article, and if I don’t
thereby hurt your Majestys affairs of what at present I have no
idea I shall be quite indifferent as what may be the
consequence with regard to myself, being Void of all other
Views but that of promoting your Majestys Interest, which I
shall ever endeavour to do att all hazard. I most humbly beg
this letter may not be made known to my Lord S[emple] and
Mr. W[atson][201] least it unreasonably make differences
amongst those concerned in your Majestys affairs, but if
sending them a Copy will in your Majestys opinion be of any
Service, I can with great Satisfaction sacrifice the private
Regard of any man to the trueth and to my King and Country.
This seems to be a Copy of a Letter which Mr. Murray wrote after his
return from France and Flanders in the Moneths of September or October,
1744, To the young Pretender, then in France.[202]
Sir,—It gives me the most Concern I
should have been so long in this Country
without having it in my power to acquaint your Murray to
Royal Highness with what has passed since I Prince Charles
left France, except in the short Letter I was necessitate to write
from London under Cover to Mr. Lumly or Maxwell.[203] I dont
now remember whilst being then able to find no other
conveyance and since my Arrival here, there has been no
Occasion till the present tho’ I have laid myself out to find one,
as I might not so distinctly as I incline, acquaint your Royal
Highness of every thing by way of letter. I have taken the
Liberty to write in form of a journal with opinions of the several
Persons I have had occasion to talk to.
I sett out from Senlis[204] on Wednesday morning and on
Thursday night came to Brussels. From thence I went next day
to Termonde, where I mett with 636, 616, 1614, 12, 30, 1392,
[205] who I spoke to as ordered by Mr. Burnet.[206] He seemed
a little Timerous at first, but nevertheless promised to do all in
his power with his Brother Officers, and to write Mr. Fisher[206]
under the name of Burnet subscribing himself Cuming. On the
Saturday I went to 425, 1876, 1614,[207] in Company with Mr.
434, 1054, 1730,[208] to whom I spoke all night and found him
so frank as to give me his word of honour that he would come
over immediately upon my writing to him that he would use his
Interest with the 1495 of his 598, 1614,[209] and go to
Charleroy and talk with Some of Coaliers[210] and promised
likewise to Send me over a list of the recruiting officers for this
year, with a mark to those that might be spoke to. From that
came to Rotterdam on Saturday where he informed me that
there was nothing easier than to gett Arms of all kinds by
applying to any Jew att Amsterdam who would oblige himself
upon a penalty to give any number att whatever port in Holland
we desired, and that as this was done dayly, it would create no
Suspicion. There mett with 1389, 1051, C13,[211] to whom I
repeated what had passed from the time I left him, and
delivered him two letters from Mr. Burnet[206] with which he
seemed exceedingly well pleased. I had many conversations
with him on these Subjects, and upon the whole he was, and
still is of Opinion that the English will not be brought to enter
upon any Scheme without a foreign force, and that Mr.
Burnet’s[212] coming to Scotland without their concurrence
must be of the worse consequence, as from that quarter alone
their did not appear the least probability of Success; for which
reason, if the french do not putt in Execution the following
Spring what they proposed the passed, he proposes as the
dernier Resort to make an offer to the King of the Crown of
Scotland upon the footing of the Antient Allience with France;
but of this I shall say nothing, leaving to him to explain it
himself, and as to raising a Sum of money is of Opinion it will
be very difficult, if at all possible. On the friday Se-en night,[213]
after leaving Senlis I arrived att London and nixt morning went
to wait of Mr. Moore[214] but missed him, however in the
evening I gott him at home but found him quite a different man
from what I had left him, very reserved and did not offer to
show me any letter he had received during my Absence tho’
Martin[215] informed me he had given him one the post before.
I then talked to him a little different of the frenches intentions,
at least for this Winter season, to which he answered he looked
upon the King of France as a man of honour, and that to be
sure he would not give Mr. Fisher[212] such promises if he did
not seriously intend to serve him. I endeavoured to show him
from the then Situation of the french officers that it was
unreasonable to expect it, but all to no purpose. Then I told him
that Mr. Fisher desired Letters so and so adressed should
Morris,[216] this he said was not in his power for he did not
know the person in the City forwarded them, but promised to
speak with Martin, who was acquainted with, and usually
carried his Letters, who was acquainted with him. I nixt spoke
to him of raising a Sum of money to purchase Arms as likewise
a few thousand pounds for Mr. Burnets[217] Own Use who was
much pinched by the small allowance he had from Mr. Adams.
[218] He told me that was what he could say nothing off, but
that he knew their had been a Sum remitted to him last Spring
by the way of Amsterdam. I then asked him to suppose the
case that the french would do nothing, whether he imagined
Saville[219] would join heartily with Sanderson[220] to bring
about 407. Smith;[221] to which he answered as before, about
the money that he knew nothing about it and so would not give
his Opinion. Upon which I enjoined him upon Mr. Burnets[217]
Name to mention that to none but whom Mr. Bright[222] and he
should agree upon his Coming to Town, and desired to know
how soon he thought that should be, which he still answered as
before. From all which I could plainly see he had gott his
Lesson from the other side. What made this the more obvious
to me, in talking of raising money to purchase Arms, I told him
it would be absolutely necessary, for tho’ in Diepe[223] we had
men and them very willing to fight, yet we had no money, and
Arms for not above 7000 if so many; A number far inferior to
what I had before told him would appear. Upon which he
immediately indeavoured to catch me by saying he hoped I had
got no bad news from Doit[224] to Occasion my Diminishing the
number of Loyalists which obliged me to explain the matter by
telling him that in 1829, 1274, 1381, 1721,[225] a Gentleman
[whose] following consisted perhaps of 800 had not arms for
above one half and so of the rest, by which means they all in
general when spoke to, declared they were not Armed. This, he
no doubt did with Intent to find me out in a Contradiction which
he could not have failed to represent to his friends on the other
side by the first post, who would have made their own use of it
with Mr. Burnet.[226] Two days after, I went again to wait of him
and enquire if he had settled that Correspondence as Mr.
Fisher[226] desired, when he told me with great indifference
that he had never spoke of it, and that the packets were to be
stoped going any Longer from Dover to Calais, so that their
must be a new conveyance settled, but how that was to be
done he did not know. I then left him, and wrote the Short
Letter I before mentioned to Mr. Burnet.[226] Then sett out for
Doit, and on tuesday the 2d of October met with 1443, 1721,
530, 1489, 699, 1051, 1798,[227] a young Gentleman of a very
large fortune, who I acquainted in general with my having seen
Mr. Fisher[226] and what he proposed, upon which he very
frankly offered to raise a sum of Money provided the others
who I told off were to be applyed he would agree to it and that
he would stay some time longer than he proposed, having
intended to go to London, and is now in this place but of
Opinion that nothing can be done without either a foreign force
or the concurrence of Sidley.[228] Upon tuesday the ninth of
October, I sent an Express to Mr. Bright,[229] then at the Earl of
Nidsdales, and upon thursday morning he came to my house
where I acquainted him with everything I had done from my
Arrival at London. He seemed very much concerned that so
many years and so much money had been spent to no
purpose, but as he was obliged to return early nixt morning
would not give his Opinion of the present footing things were
on till his return home. Upon the 16th, I went with an intention
to see Sir 1293, 43C, 1055, 1744, 1045, 1948, 1679, 1778,[230]
and inform him fully of Mr. Burnets[226] resolutions, but found
he was in fife, and his family uncertain of his Return, so
proceeded to Edinburgh from whence I wrote the 18th of
October to Mr. Fergus,[231] begging he would meet me at Mr.
Brights[229] house about the 26th, and one inclosed to Mr. Dan,
[232] desiring him to come immediately. I soon received a letter
informing me that Mr. Dan was come, and desired to see me,
but as at this time my wife was taken very ill, I sent a servant
that same night to town desiring the favour of a visit from him in
the Country, which he declined, thinking it would look too
suspicious as I was so lately come home and he only two days
in Town, so rather choose to delay it for som little time. I
likewise received a letter from Mr. Fergus,[233] telling me he
could not for some weeks see me. I was now become very
uneasy to think I had been for above a moneth in the Country
without being able to do any thing, when luckily, about
the of the moneth Mr. Bright[234] called on me in his very
home and promised to be in town 3 or 4 days after, which
determined me to go nixt day, and that night I mett with Mr.
Bright (who had been called by express) and Mr. Dan, when I
read them a journal of what had passed from my leaving Diepe
the 7th of July, and acquainted them with Mr. Burnets[235]
Resolutions in case the french failed him. They were both well
pleased with the proposal of Sidly and Sanderson[236] acting in
conjuncion, but Equally against Mr. Fisher’s[235] relying upon
Sanderson alone. I nixt day gave Mr. Dan the Letter designed
for Nicolson,[237] which he delivered to him, and made an
apointment to meet with me the same night which he
accordingly did; but as he had drunk a little too much we
differred having any positive answer from him. I told Mr. Dan
there was a necessity for the other Letters being delivered
immediately and that I depended upon him to do it. Found, as
he was then about getting his Charter from the Duke of Argyle,
and had given that for the reason of his coming up, it was
impossible for him to Return without giving Suspicion. I for the
second time had the misfortune to miss Sir 1293, 43C, 1055,
1744, 1045, 948, 1679, 1778,[238] being gone to his house in
the West, nor have I yett been able to see him, as I have
almost ever since been obliged to Stay in this place. I left town
munday 12 and returned thursday the 15th, where Mr. Dan
came to me before dinner and told me that young Kinny[239]
desired to speak with me, so I agreed to meet him that Evening
Att 4 o’Clock, where he informed me that Lord Semple[240] and
Mr. Drummond had refused to do Business any longer, that
they had sent John Drummond[241] to him att Dunkirk to
acquaint him that I had made Mr. Burnet[242] believe they were
not trusted by his friends, and that they had then a prospect on
the Tapis but had given it up, and told him that I had at the
same time perswaded Mr. Fisher[243] to come ovir with the
intent to make himself 1357[244] and leave his father att
Harfleur,[245] which I take God to Witness I never since
mentioned to him as indeed it is one of the things in the world
most against my principles upon which alone I have always
acted in Mr. Ellis’s[246] affairs. Kinnys opinion of them, together
with what I told him, easily convinced him of the folly of their
Story.
Some few days after this Mr. Fergus[247] came to town and
stayed for near two weeks, he has procured the small Vessel
by which this comes, and will order it to and again so often as
Occasion shall offer. I had several conversations with him on
the present State of affairs, but shall confine them all to his
Answer, we shall he Subjoin with that of the rest, having gott
them to putt their several Opinions in writing. I shall there putt
down Mr. Fergus, Mr. Bright[248] and Mr. Dans[249] opinion with
regard to some of the Articles I was charged with in the
memorandum. Which notwithstanding they were (save Fergus)
against Mr. Burnets[243] coming over, at any rate to Doit,[250] I
nevertheless insisted upon it to show that I had not neglected
any particular of my orders, and first as to Mr. Brights[248] going
to London he proposes being there before the end of January,
2ndly The letters wrote to the several persons for money
should be delivered with an Apology, that they could be wrote
to in no other stile in case they had miscarried, 3rdly, The place
Mr. Burnet[243] was to meet should be some small distance
from Aberdeen, upon that part of the Coast lying towards
Dundee, and that we should here be acquainted by one sent
over a moneth before, of the day he determined to sail,
providing the weather favoured him, and the moment he
landed to send an express to Mr. Fergus,[249] and one to Mr.
Dan[247] with instructions what day they were to ...
[Hiatus in MSS.]
4ly as to providing of Swords it is what they dayly do, but
the number to be had so small as not to be regarded. 5tly The
making of Hilts and Targets impossible to be done without a
Discovery and that a few days only is required to make the
Targets so that they can be provided without trouble. 6thly, As
to a ship for Arms, Mr. Fergus engaged to provide it.
MEMORIAL CONCERNING THE
HIGHLANDS WRITTEN BY
ALEXANDER MACBEAN, A.M.
MINISTER OF INVERNESS
Inverness, 10 Octr. 1746.
The Islands of Orkney and Shetland I know little about.[251]
The Shire of Caithness is inhabited chiefly by StClairs and
Dunbars. The Earl of Caithness is Chief of the StClairs who are by
far more numerous than the other. I know not the precise number of
men they can raise but I have heard that at the Battle
of [252]fought by them against the late Earl of Breadalbin, I think in
the reign of King William, they had about 1500 men Horse and Foot.
But several gentlemen of that name living in the Orknies would on
such ocasion with their men join their friends on the Continent. Mr.
James Gilchrist, Minister at Thurso,[253] happened to be walking with
a gentleman in Summer 1744 who found a letter on the road which
when opened was found to be writ in Cypher by a gentleman of the
name of StClair to a correspondent at Edinburgh mentioning that
Shuch and Shuch would be ready at a Call each with his number of
men plainly exprest; all the names were in Cypher nor could I learn
the precise number. Mr. Gilchrist could not prevail with the
gentleman to let him have the keeping of the letter, however this
discovery was useful as it put the Lords Sutherland and Reay on
their guard. ’Twas talked here in time of the Rebellion that the
StClairs would have joined the Pretender but that they durst not pass
through Lord Sutherland’s country[254] as his men were in arms
joined by the McKays, some of the ministers of Caithness can inform
you particularly about this and about Sir James Stewart of
Burrows[255] who lives in the Orknies.
Dunbars of Caithness
I could not as yet be informed how the Dunbars of Caithness
behaved, Sir William Dunbar of Hemprigs their Chief, is the principle
man. He was reckoned well affected to Church and State.
McKays of Strathnavar
Next to Caithness, Southward and on the Western coast, is
Strathnavar the country of Lord Reay, Chief of the McKays,[256] a
zealous Presbyterian and revolutioner; with all his Clan he can raise
as near as I can guess about 600 men. The part he acted last year is
well known. It will be always mentioned to his honour that by his zeal
and diligence he got the large Parish of Diurness divided into three
and Stipends made for each of them by a general Collection through
Scotland and his own liberal assistance though his estate be but
10,000£ scots there is scarce a family in this country but has been
brought to have Family Worship, though that People was of old very
rude and barbarous.
Sutherland of Sutherland
Next to Caithness, Southward on the East coast, is the Earl of
Sutherland’s country, Chief of the name of Sutherland. His Lordship’s
affection to our Constitution in Church and State is well known;[257]
he can raise ’twixt 1200 and 1500 men; his Estate is reckoned about
£3000 scots but somewhat under burden.
McLeods of Assint
As the Shires of Sutherland and Caithness make a Peninsula
formed by the Firth of Tain from the east Sea and an arm of the
Western Ocean, that I may describe the People and the Country
more distinctly I will travel along the Western Coast and then return
Eastward.
Next to Lord Reay’s country on the south side of the Firth called
Edrachaolis and on the west coast is the country of Assint, belonging
of old to a branch of the McLeod Family. This country fell into the
hands of the McKenzies for debt in Charles the Second’s time.[258]
McLeod kept possession violently till Letters of Fire and Sword were
executed against him by the Earl of Seaforth. The Commons there
are chiefly McLeods. McLeod of Ginnies in east Ross is the heir
male of that family. He raised one of the independent Companies
last year and continued in the Government’s service till dismissed a
few weeks ago. His dwelling is about 30 miles east from Assint. After
the battle of Preston McDonald of Barisdale[259] with a few men went
to that country and recruited about 60 men, but the Lord Reay’s or
Lord Sutherland’s people—I’m not sure which—fell upon him and
[recaptured] the men. He and his company were obliged to take to
their heels. This country is an entire parish, and prodigious rough
and mountainous but famous for good pasture and good cattle. A
few of the Earl of Cromarties family lived here and were obliged to
go with him to the Rebellion. Viz. McKenzie of Ardloch.
McLeods of Cogach
To the south of Assint is the country of Cogach, a part of the
parish of Loch-Broom formerly belonging to another family of the
McLeods. [Margaret] McLeod of Cogach, the heiress of the family,
was married to George, the first Earl of Cromarty.[260] This Earl, who
was an antiquary, alleged that McLeod of Cogach was Chief of the
whole clan, and consequently he as their representative, in right of
his wife, procured the Title of Lord McLeod from Queen Anne as his
secondary title, and this country continued the property of the family
till now. Out of Cogach and some branches of his family in Loch-
Broom together with the few I have mentioned from Assint, the Earl
of Cromarty raised above 200 men for the late Rebellion. What
number he had altogether will be mentioned when I come to the East
Coast where he dwelt.
McKenzies of Loch-Broom
Next to Cogach is Loch-Broom, belonging to several small
Heritors of the name of McKenzie. John McKenzie of Ardloch and
James McKenzie of Cepoch, the only Papists that I know in all that
tract of ground except the Lady Assint, bred their children
Protestants.
Next is the Country of Gairloch, belonging mostly to McKenzies
of Gairloch.
McKenzies of Applecross and Loch-Carran
To the south of it is Applecross a new erection in the year 1720.
And next to it Loch-Carran. To this last place, the Earl of Seaforth,
[261] as we call him here, retired when the Rebels retreated North
and gathered 600 or 800 of his men about him by which he kept
them in readiness for any service proper for him to do and preserved
them from straggling companies of the Rebels who went about
recruiting men. This last is the property of the Earl.
Mathesons and Murchisons of Loch Ailsh
Next to the South is the country of Loch Ailsh the property of the
Seaforth Family. The McDonalds of Glengarry of old pretended right
to the country and had many battles and skirmishes with the
McKenzies about it. The last was a Sea-fight in Birlins and Boats,
with long poles, corn forks and Lochabyr axes, in which the
McDonalds were defeated, and Glengary with many of his company
killed.[262] This happened before the Reformation. Most of the
Commons are Mathesons and Murchisons but they join the
McKenzies.
McRaes of Kintail
Next to the South is the Parish of Kintail and the Parish of
Muick[263] a new erection in the year 1726 taken from the old Parish
of Kintail. The whole country goes under the name of Kintail. The
bulk of the inhabitants are of the name of McRae, descended from
the Campbells,[264] but they follow the Seaforth Family. Here lies
Glen Shiel.
In all this tract of ground, viz., from Lord Reay’s country on the
north to Glenelg on the south, the people are but late converts to
Presbytery. The old Episcopal Incumbents having lived long, some of
them till the year 29, I could not find that any of them took the oaths
to the Government. The gentlemen are most Episcopal and they or
their predecessors were at Shirefmoor and Glen Sheil with the late
Seaforth.[265] But by the good disposition of the present Seaforth to
our happy establishment, they did not think fit to join in the late
Rebellion, excepting a few younger brothers who had nothing to lose
and are now prisoners in London. The first Presbyterian Minister was
planted in Assint in the year 1727 at Loch-Broom. He landed much
sooner, but though married to a native he was so miserable that he
could not live in the country.
After him Mr. James Smith, now Minister at Creich in Sutherland,
was ordained for the place by the Presbytery of Dingwall. The first
night he came to his Parish both the eyes were plucked out his horse
as his welcome to the country. Applecross, Kintail and Muick were
not planted till the year 1730; Loch Carran in the year 1725. Mr. John
McKilikin was ordained at Dingwall for the parish of Loch Ailsh a
good time ago and though he lived for several years, he never durst
enter his parish, and after his death, the Presbytery who went there
to command the people about filling the parish in the year 1721 or
1722, were made prisoners in the house where they met, by men in
women’s clothes, and their faces blackened. A pledge was
demanded of them that they should never come to that country,
which they refusing, they sent a Guard of this black crew with each
of them towards their respective homes. But in the year 1727 a
minister was planted there who got peaceable possession. In all or
most of these parishes the Sacrament of the Supper has been lately
administered and the Commons are already much recovered from
their blindness and bigotry, and some of the gentlemen.
[The Long Island][266]
In all this tract of ground there are no Papists but what I have
named. I know the country minutely, and ministers are tolerably well
accommodated in Stipend, Manse, and Glebe. I will speak of the
number of men Seaforth can raise when I come to the east side of
the country where his seat stands.
Opposite to the coast I have been describing is the Long Island.
That part of it to the North, called Lewis, belongs to the Seaforth
Family. It was formerly the property of McLeod of Lewis, now extinct.
[267] The People here are Protestants and do not dislike the present
Clergy; there were two new erections made here, Anno 1726, before
the estate of Seaforth was sold by the Government; so that this
country is in a tolerable state of reformation.
The next district of the Long Island is called Harris. The people
Protestants: it belongs to the Laird of McLeod. The next portion
southward is called North Uist. The people Protestants; Sir
Alexander [Macdonald] of Slate, Proprietor, South Uist belongs to
McDonald of Moidart, or the Captain of Clanranald, as they call him.
The present Clanranald lived here: he and his People are Papists, as
is McNeil of Barra,[268] and his People. In the Uists and Barra are
one or two new erections of late; but by the influence of the Gentry,
the diligence and insolence of the Priests, and the bigotry of the
people, the ministers had little success till now. Old Clanranald was
not in arms in the late Rebellion nor could many of his people in Uist
get over to the Continent, for the ships of war that cruised upon the
coast.
[The Macdonalds]
As I have mentioned two families of the McDonalds, I will say
something of them in general. They would be a great Clan and next
to the Campbells in strength and number, if united under one head:
but the several families of them, viz.: Clanranald, the Slate family,
the Glengarry family, the Keppoch family, and even the Glencoe
family, all pretend to be the lineal heir of McDonald of the Isles, Earl
of Ross, who was forfeited in the time of James the Second, for
joining with the Duglases and others in the Great Rebellion that then
happened; and this division makes them less potent and formidable
than otherwise they would be.[269] I once made an abstract of the
several Rebellions and Insurrections of the McDonalds against the
Kings of Scotland, and especially against the Stuart Family; by which
it was very evident this people was seldom loyal to any King on the
throne. If they could find no Pretender, they would find some
pretence or other for war and plunder. But this paper I have lost.
[Skye]
The next Island to the South and East is Skye, the property of
McDonald of Slate, McLeod and McInnin,[270] The people
Protestants, the Commons and most of the Gentry better disposed
than those in Seaforth’s country, on the opposite continent. Here is a
new erection or two made Anno 1726. Egg, Rum, Muick and
Canney, etc., are little Isles adjacent to Sky; the inhabitants Popish.
But about 30 years ago, McLean of Coll is said to have converted a
pragmatical, forward fellow, who misled the rest, by insulting him in
their presence, and on this the inhabitants of that Island became
Protestants.[271] These Isles were erected into a Parish in Anno
1726.[272]
[Glenelg and Knoydart]
The next country southward on the continent is Glenelg, the
property of the Laird of McLeod. The people Protestants and honest,
and generally well disposed: here are Barracks built for two or three
companies of soldiers near the Strait that divides Sky from Glenelg:
this country is fertile in grass and corn. Here are two famous Danish
Forts of dry stone built very high which I have seen.
To the south an arm of the sea called Lochiurn, i.e., Helsloch[273]
runs up ’twixt this country and Cnoidart. This last is the property of
Glengarry, and the most mountainous, craggy, and coarse of all the
Highlands: the roads are so eminently bad that there is no thought of
riding in it, and in some places so steep and rocky, that they have
ropes of withs tied to trees to take hold of, lest passengers should
fall and break their bones. The people all Papists and mostly thieves.
’Tis a part of the parish of Glenelg, but they never give the minister
any trouble, except in collecting his Stipend. Here lived those famous
Cadets of Glengarrie’s family, Barisdale, and Scotos,[274] who had
almost the whole country in bondage, and the people their slaves.
[Moidart and Arisaig]
To the south of Knoidart lies Moidart and Arasag, the property of
Clanranald. The people Popish but not so thievish as in Knoidart.
Next it lies two great glens called Moroirs; the one of them belongs
to Glengarry and the other to McDonald, commonly called McDonald
of Moroir. The Inhabitants Popish. The two principal Cadets of the
Clanranald family are Kinloch Moidart and Moroir, and their
branches,[275] all Popish. These four last countries, viz., Moidart,
Arasag and the two Moroirs are in the parish of Ardnamurchan, and
they with Knoidart are commonly called the Highlands by the other
Highlanders. The people of Lochabyr, Glengarry, and Stratherrick
reckoning their own country level in comparison of these.
Next lies Ardnamurchan in which is the famous Lead Quarry,
Strontian, the property of Murray of Stanhope:[276] it belonged till of
late to Sir Duncan Campbell of Lochnell: and was taken about the
time of the Reformation by Sir Donald Campbell of Ardnamurchan, a
natural son to Calder, from McDonald the old Proprietor. The people
are generally Protestants, but with a mixture of Papists. Many of the
inhabitants are Camerons and McLachlans, and violently Episcopal.
[Ardnamurchan, Morvern and Maclean’s Country]
As I am now arrived at the Cape commonly called
Ardnamurchan, I turn back to the north east, where on the Sound of
Mull lies the country of Morven the property of the Duke of Argyle.
The people Protestants; many of them Camerons, McLachlans and
McLeans: much inclined to Episcopacy, and consequently Jacobites.
There are few or no Papists: of old this country belonged to the
McLean family.
The next country on the north east and still on the Sound of Mull
is Kingairloch, the property of McLean of Kingairloch. He himself was
not in the Rebellion but I saw two or three of his brothers there. The
people Episcopal, and Jacobite.
Next, still north east, and on an arm of the sea lies Ardgour, the
property of McLean of Ardgour; his country lies ten or twelve miles
along the sea-coast till you come to the head of Locheil. He is a well
disposed old man, but as his estate is much out of his hand, his
influence was not great; the people Protestants. Here lived Ludovick
Cameron,[277] Uncle to Locheil, who brought out many of the
inhabitants to the Rebellion, especially the Camerons who lived
here.
Having now travelled on the north side of the Sound of Mull as far
as the sea goes up, the last five miles of which is called Locheil, I go
back to the islands in the Sound, and then will come along the south
coast, and describe the countries inhabited by Rebels; I will
afterwards describe the rest of Argyle if you require it.
[Lismore, Mull, Strathlachlan]
The first island of any note is Lismore; a most fertile soil; all
founded on Limestone, and like garden ground, which the name of
the island imports. Here was the seat of the Bishop of the Isles: it lies
in the Sound opposite to Lorn and Appin; the people Protestants and
well disposed. It is but eight miles long and one broad, and is the
property of ten or twelve heritors. To the west hereof lies Mull, a
large island containing three Parishes, mostly the Property of the
Duke of Argyle; formerly the property of McLean of Dowart. McLean
of Lochbuie has still an estate here, of about 6000 Merks: the people
Protestants mostly and well affected; but from this island, Morvern
and Kingairloch there came about nine score McLeans to the
Rebellion, of whom returned but 38 as a McLean told me.[278] The
islands of Tyree, Coll, Jura, Colonsay, Islay, Gigha, etc. I omit as
there were no men from them in the Rebellion. Only before I come to
the southeast coast of the Sound of Mull, I must not omit a
gentleman who rose with his men from the heart of the country of
Argyle, I mean the Laird of McLachlan;[279] his small country called
Strathlachlan lies to the south of Inverary and on the south side of
Lochfine. He is Chief of the McLachlans, and had as I am informed,
near 300 men in the Rebellion, but of the number I am not quite
sure; Mr. Alexr. Campbell, minister of Inverary, must know.[280] His
people of a long time profest to be of our Communion, but one Mr.
John McLachlan,[281] a most violent Episcopal minister poisoned his
Chief and the gentlemen of his name to a strange degree, and
indeed did more mischief among other clans than any three priests I
ever knew.
[Appin and Glencoe]
I now come as I promised to the coast on the south east side of
the Sound of Mull. The first dissaffected country is Appin, inhabited
by the Stuarts. The Laird of Appin[282] keeps quiet at home but the
gentlemen of his clan and his tenants were in the Rebellion. The
people here are Protestants, but strangely poisoned by the
Nonjurant Episcopal Clergy. Adjacent to Appin is Glencoe; a small
place; McDonald of Glencoe is Superior.[283] He can raise of his

Visual Complex Analysis 25Th Anniversary Edition Tristan Needham 2 All Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Visual Complex Analysis 25Th Anniversary Edition Tristan Needham 2 All Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Visual Complex Analysis: 25th

Anniversary Edition Tristan Needham

Principal Changes in the New Edition

would reject or even ridicule7 my Newtonian arguments. I therefore sought to con-

In this 25th Anniversary Edition, every figure now has a caption

• Newton’s concept of ultimate equality underlies many of the arguments in this

Let me now expand upon this vitally important point . . .

More on Newton’s Principia and His Concept of Ultimate Equality

X≍Y&P≍Q =⇒ X · P ≍ Y · Q, and A ≍ B · C ⇐⇒ (A/B) ≍ C.

Let us show that if T = tan θ, then dT 2

pleasurably than would otherwise be possible.” So, to preemptively address my

The Continued Relevance of the Unorthodox Contents of VCA

• Hyperbolic Geometry violates the normal rules of Euclidean geometry, and it

(1946–2012)—subsequently vindicated by Perelman in 2003, six years after the pub-

• Möbius Transformations are mappings of the form

• The Pólya Vector Field of a complex mapping z ÞÑ f(z) was introduced by

K of radius r, traced counterclockwise, we obtain an immediate visual and physical

The Quiet Revolution

The Book’s Newtonian Genesis

series, which Newton likened to the manipulation of decimal expansions in arith-

Reading This Book

Teaching from this Book

Such a course might go as follows: All of Chapter 1; the unstarred parts of

Omissions and Apologies

A significant proportion of the geometric observations and arguments contained

First and foremost I wish to express my indebtedness to Dr. Stanley Nel. He is my

• Nancy Campagna for her diligent proof-reading of half the book;

my conception of the nature of mathematics, and of what constitutes an acceptable

1 Geometry and Complex Arithmetic 1

2 Complex Functions as Transformations 61

2.2.2 Cubics Revisited* 66

3 Möbius Transformations and Inversion 137

3.1.2 The Connection with Einstein’s Theory of

3.7.2 Elliptic, Hyperbolic, and Loxodromic

4 Differentiation: The Amplitwist Concept 213

4.7.2 Breakdown of Conformality 232

5 Further Geometry of Differentiation 245

5.11 Analytic Continuation* 281

6 Non-Euclidean Geometry* 303

7 Winding Numbers and Topology 385

8 Complex Integration: Cauchy’s Theorem 429

8.2.2 The Trapezoidal Rule 432

8.12 The General Formula of Contour Integration 475

9 Cauchy’s Formula and Its Applications 485

10 Vector Fields: Physics and Topology 511

11 Vector Fields and Complex Integration 537

12 Flows and Harmonic Functions 577

12.4.3 Further Complex Curvature Calculations 594

You might also like