[Satan’s Invisible World Contents]
f the parentage, place of birth, or early life, of that singular character but well-known mathematical writer GEORGE SINCLAR, who was Professor of Philosophy and afterwards of Mathematics, in the College of Glasgow in the latter part of the seventeenth century, no particulars have been ascertained. His brother, John Sinclar, A.M., Regent in St. Leonard’s College, St. Andrews, was presented to the church and parish of Ormiston in East Lothian in 1646, and admitted 1647; he was a member of Assembly in 1648; and was appointed one of the visitors to the University of Edinburgh, 1649. He was one of those who adhered to the Protestors in 1651, and was named by the Protector in the Province of Lothian, Merse, and Teviotdale, for visiting the Universities and authorising godly and able men to enjoy their livings, 1654. He seems to have been connived at until the Test was put in operation in 1681, when he was deposed by public order of the Bishop of Edinburgh in December 1682. He removed to Holland, and commenced an academy where he prepared many of his countrymen, while sojourning there, for the University. He was elected to the congregation at Delft, 1683, but only admitted in 1684, having been interrupted by official authority on account of his offending the Government in Scotland, who had raised against him, for treasonable practices, a process, which ended in his forfeiture in September 1684. His incumbency there, however, was of short duration, for he died in 1687, aged about 69 years. His son John was minister of Kirkpatrick-Irongray in 1690, and died in 1693. He was much given to mathematical studies, but unfortunately disposed to melancholy.1
Sinclar was elected ‘Master’ in the College of Glasgow on the 18th October 1654.2
In the seventeenth century, the recovery of sunk vessels and their contents was a favourite project among ingenious and adventurous men. The late Marquis of Argyll had obtained from the Duke of Lennox, Lord High Admiral of Scotland, a formal gift of the Florida, a large vessel of the Spanish Armada of 1588, which had been blown up and sunk in the Bay of Tobermory in the Island of Mull. The guns, treasure, and other valuable things, known or supposed to have been on board, made the incident a memorable one and induced a desire, if possible, to weigh up the vessel, or at least to fish up from it such things as might be accessible to divers. In 1655, a more vigorous attempt to get up some of its treasures was made by the then Earl of Argyll, the immediate operator being apparently MAULE of Melgum, a Forfarshire gentleman who had invented an apparatus precisely of the nature of what was a century later revived as the Diving bell. Another person engaged in the business was the almost sole active cultivator of physics in Scotland during this age, – the celebrated George Sinclar, Professor of Philosophy in the University of Glasgow. Sinclar, in his work ‘Ars Nova et Magna, &c.,’ tells us that on this occasion they brought up three pieces of ordnance, one of brass, one of copper, and one of iron. Two of them were eleven feet in length, and more things might have been recovered but for the coming on of tempestuous weather. He says they were surprised to find that the bullets employed for these guns were of stone, instead of metal.
In his subsequent work, ‘Hydrostatical Experiments,’ Sinclar describes a kind of diving-bell of his own invention, which he called an Ark.
Sinclar, in 1656, gave towards the ‘Building of the College of Glasgow’ the sum of ‘A Hundreth Merkes, – £66, 13s. 4d.’
On the 9th December 1659 there was passed ‘An Act of the Moderators anent the repayment to the Masters of the several sums they had advanced for the New Buildings at the Colledge of Glasgow, in which they doe therefore appoynt and ordeane the soume of Five Hundreth Merkes lent equally betuixt Mr. Andrew Burnet and Mr. George Sinclar be thankfully repayet by the Colledge to them, with the Interest.’ Sinclar’s first known work, ‘Tyrocinia Mathematica, in Quatuor Tractatus, viz., Arithmeticum, Sphæricum, Geographicum et Echometricum Divisa, with a Dedication to the ‘Nobiliss. et Illustriss. Domino, D. Joanni Lauderiæ Comiti, Vicecomiti Metellano, D. à Thirlstane, Boltoun, &c,’ was published at Glasgow in 1661. 18mo. This was re-issued with a new title-page as ‘Principia Mathematica, Editio Secunda Priori correctior. London, 1672. 18mo.
On the 24th June 1662, an ‘Act of Parliament was passed concerning Masters of Universities, Ministers, &c., in which it was declared ‘That from this time forth no Masters, Principall, Regents, nor other Professors in Universities or Colledges within this Kingdome be admitted or allowed to continow in the exercise of any function within the same, but such as are of a pious, loyall, and peaceable conversation submitting to and ouning the Government of the Church by Archbishops and Bishops now satled by law, and who haveing given satisfaction therein to the Bishops of the respective Diocesses and patrons, and haveing in their presence taken the Oath of Alledgeance, shall procure their attestation of the same,.. that they have taken the oath of alledgeance, and that they are persons who submit to and oun the Government as now settled by law, &c.’
On the 18th October 1665 an Act was passed assigning a house to him, – ‘The whilk day the Facultie, being conveined with the express advyce and consent of the Archbishop of Glasgow, have thought fit for Mr. George Sinclar’s encouragement, that he should be allowed the use of one of the dwelling-houses belonging to the Professours of Divinitie, and that only during the Masters of the Universitie ther pleasure; it being always provyded that the Professor of Divinitie, whose place is now vacant, shall at his entrie have the choyse of any of the two lodgings, as also that quhat expense shall be bestowed by Mr. George in repairing and rectifying the said house, the Colledge being always oblidged to keep his house watertight, shall be upon Mr. George’s own proper charge.’ On the 6th January 1666, ‘The Moderators of the Colledge of Glasgow being ordourlie conveined in the Facultie House. Efter prayer, my Lord Archbishope of Glasgow produced ane Act of his Majestie’s Commissione for visiting of Universities, dated at Edinburgh the 14 day of Februar 1665, ordaining the Professors, Principalls, Regents, and other Masters of the Universities to take the oath of Alledgeance in the presence of the Archbishope or Bishope of the Diocese… As likwayes another Act dated at Edinburgh the Sixt of December 1665, ordaineing the former act to be putt to deu executione betuixt and the thrid Tuesday of Januar 1666, and that all persones who refuse to give obedience thereto betuixt and the forsaid tyme be… depryved of ther functiones and benefices, and to be maid incapable of exercesing any functione heirefter withein any of the Universities, &c.’ On the 17th March 1666, “The whilk day being conveined in the Faculty House, my Lord Archbishope, &c., &c., my Lord Archbishope, according to the ordinatione of the Commissione for Visitatione of Universities, requyred Mr. George Sinclar to give obedience to the Actis of the said Commissione relating to the taking of the Oathe of Alledgeance, and subscryveing his submitting to and owneing the Churche Government, as it is now established by law. Master George desyreing ane delay till Tuesday nixt, the Faculty granted it to him on this conditione that if he did not give obedience to the said actis betuixt and Tuesday nixt… he shall be actually deposed the said day without any further prorogatione or delay, according to the ordinatione of the said visitatione.’ On the 17th June 1666, his Demission is received and recorded as follows:- ‘I, Master George Sinclar, Regent in the Colledge of Glasgow, grants me by thir presents to have demitted… my office of Regency in the said Colledge, and resignes the same into the hands of the Masters of the said Colledge, to be provyded as they shall think expedient. In witnesse wherof, I have subscrived thir presents with my hand at Glasgow, the 21 day of March 1666. (Signed) Geo. Sinclar.’ He having thus declined to comply with the Episcopal form of Church government, then thrust upon the people of Scotland, was ejected from his office of Professorship in the College. It is reported that afterwards he betook himself to the business of a mineral surveyor and practical engineer, and was employed in that profession by several proprietors of mines in the southern parts of Scotland, and particularly by Sir James Hope who, having sat in Barebone’s Parliament, was probably nowise averse to his Presbyterian principles.
Sinclar was among the first in Britain who attempted to measure the heights of mountains by the Barometer. It is said that Hartfell, near Moffat, was the first hill in Scotland of which the height was thus ascertained. In the years 1668 and 1670, he observed the altitudes of Arthur’s Seat, Leadhills, and Tinto, above the adjacent plains. He followed the original mode of carrying a sealed tube to the top of the mountain, where, filling it with quicksilver, and inverting it in a basin, he marked the elevation of the suspended column, and repeated the same experiment below; a very rude method, certainly, but no better was practised in England for more than thirty years afterwards. To the instrument fitted up in a frame, Sinclar first gave the name Baroscope, or Indicator of weight, – a term afterwards changed for Barometer, or Measurer of weight. In these rude attempts at measuring Heights by the mercurial column, the atmosphere was regarded simply as an homogeneous fluid and as possessing the same density throughout its whole mass, a supposition which, it is needless to point out, must have led the observer wide of the truth where the elevation was considerable. In 1669, his ‘Ars Nova et Magna Gravitatis et Levitatis, sive Dialogorum Philosophicorum Libri Sex De Aeris verâ ac reali Gravitate, &c.,’ was published at Rotterdam, Sm. 4to, with a eulogistic ‘Epistle Dedicatory to Domino Georgio a Wintonio, Comiti Domino Seton, Baroni a Tranent, Westnidre et Hartside, &c., E tuo hospitio Tranentensi Calend. Janua. 1668;’ and having as a Frontispiece a fine large engraving of the Seton arms.
In 1672, he published in Edinburgh his ‘Hydrostaticks; or, The Weight, Force, and Pressure of Fluid Bodies, made evident by Physical and Sensible Experiments. Together with some Miscellany Observations, the last whereof is a Short History of Coal, and of all the common, and proper Accidents thereof; a subject never treated of before.’ With a highly eulogistic ‘Epistle Dedicatory to my very Honourable, and Noble Lord, Robert Viscount of Oxfuird, Lord Mackgill of Cousland, &c.; and Notices to the Reader, Sm. 4to. Copies of this singular publication occasionally turn up, having an Engraved Titlepage, and Plate of the Arms of Lord Oxfuird; with a ‘POSTSCRIPT.’ Such, however, are exceedingly scarce.
The self-complacency of Sinclar, and his Presbyterian principles, appear to have provoked an attack from a quarter least expected.
In December 1671, he had issued Proposals for the Publication of this work with an outline of the subjects to be treated, and solicited the assistance of subscriptions towards defraying the expenses thereof. This procedure seems to have led to some rather severe attacks upon him and his intended NEW Book, chiefly from St. Andrews, in the form of letters; some of them anonymous, and others from Mr. Patrick Mathers, Arch-Bedale to the University of St. Andrews.’ In the ‘Address to the Reader, May 20, 1672,’ he remarks – ‘When this Book was first committed to the press, I sent an intimation thereof to some of my friends, for their encouragement to it, a practice now common, and commendable, which hath not wanted a considerable success, as witness the respect of many worthy persons, to whom I am oblidged. But there is a GENERATION, that rather, than they will encourage any new invention, set themselves by all means to detract from it, and the authors of it; so grieved are they, that ought of this kind should fall into the hands of any, but their own. And, therefore, if the author shall give but the title of NEW to his invention, though never so deservedly, they fly presently in his throat, like so many Wild-Catts, studying either to ridicule his work altogether – a trade that usually, the person of weakest abilities, and most empty heads, are better at, than learned men; like those schollars, who, being nimble in putting tricks, and impostures upon their Condisciples, were dolts, as to their lesson, or else fall upon it with such snarling and carping as discover neither ingenuity, nor ingeniousness, but a sore sickness called, ENVY. In the intimation, I affirmed that the Doctrine concerning the Weight and Pressure of the Water was NEW. This one word, like a spark of fire falling accidently among powder, hath been the occasion of so much debate. Their ground is, because they look upon the Hydrostaticks as a Science long ago perfected… They affirm, likewise, that all the Theorems and Experiments that are here, are either deduceable from Archimedes and Stevinus, or are the same with theirs. If these Gentlemen had suspended their judgment till this book had been published, I suspect they would not have spoken so confidently… My Antagonists affirm they are able to deduce my Theorems, and the events of all my Experiments from the grounds of Archimedes and Stevinus. If they take not their word again, I hope they will do it; for now I put them to it. And though they should, (which I am not affraid they shall do in haste) yet they must prove next, that these Theorems and Conclusions, so deduced, are not new, which all their Logick will not prove. But what if we do more, (say they), even overthrow many of all your Aerostatical and Hydrostatical Experiments, in this, and in your last piece? I give you liberty; and for your hire, a Guiny for each Theorem, or experiment you are able to ransack, in either of the two Books, though they come near to an hundred. But, ye must oblige your selves (my masters) to do it with reason, laying aside your sophistry and Canina eloquentia. And this I offer, reader, that I may reduce them to a better humour, and encourage them to leave off flyting, and only use reason. Neither must they be like the Wasp, that only lights upon the sore place. But if they love to kindle any more fire, they will find me proof against it. If it burn them, it shall not heat me. Nevertheless, if they love to juik under deck, like Green-horns, having no courage in themselves, or confidence in their cause; they must excuse me, if at last, I write their names upon a Ticket and bring them above deck. This is all I have to say, at present (Reader), and I bid thee farewell.’ Apparently at this time Sinclar was not acquainted with the names of his opponents, who shielded themselves under the shade of ‘such a poor pitiful fellow as the Bedale.’ The attacks upon him being continued, he issued, in the form of a ‘POSTSCRIPT,’ a vindication of himself and his works, remarking to the reader, ‘That thou mayest know the rise and occasion of this Postscript,.. I shall give thee this short account:- ‘When this Book was first committed to the press, I sent an intimation thereof to several persons, whom I judged would encourage it, yet to none but to such in whose kindness I had confidence, and whom I judged my real friends. Among others, I sent over to Saint Andrews one of my Edicts; to one or two there in whom I trusted, but instead of a kindly return from them to whom I had written most affectionately they wrot back a Letter, wherein they superciliously condemn the purposes of this Book, before ever they had seen them.’
This is followed by his printing ONE of the letters which he had received from St. Andrews, with his reply, remarking, ‘I returned a most discreet answer, thinking to conquer their humour with civility and kindness, but not long after, hearing of their clamour against the Intimation and of their disswading others, who would willingly (I suppose) have condescended.’ He then proceeds, at some length, to justify himself from the ‘Barbarous railings, passing all bounds of civility,’ to which he had been subjected, never having imagined that ‘his friend Professor Gregory’ was really his sole opponent, and the cause of all this mischief! He complains that ‘the Arch-Bedale endeavoureth to put Mr. James Gregory between him and me also; and bringeth him in speaking of my writings with such a deal of disdain and sauciness, ut nihil supra. What? Was Mr. James Gregory such an eminent person, that he could not speak his thoughts himself, but needeth you, sir, for a Proxy, and Chancellour to speak for him. If Mr. James Gregory will speak to me, what you have spoken in his name, he shall have an answer. But I have no mind to gratify so far your doli and fallaciae, as to fall on any man upon your word, having so little confidence of your common honesty… I desire to live peaceably with all men. Neither shall I be soon provocked, so long as they keep within the bounds of civility. If that be observed, I shall thank them, for any mistake they shall let me see in my writings, if done with reason, and without railing.’
The Publication of this ‘POSTSCRIPT’ appears to have done no good, but quite the reverse; for there was printed at Glasgow in 1672, a small 18mo volume under the rather quaint title of ‘The Great and New Art of Weighing Vanity; or, A Discovery of the Ignorance and Arrogance of the Great and New Artist in his Pseudo-Philosophical Writings. By M. Patrick Mathers, Arch-Bedal to the University of S. Andrews. To which are annexed some Tentamina de motu penduli et projectorum.’ Under this assumed name this little piece of satire was written to expose the ignorance of Sinclar in his Hydrostatical Writings, by JAMES GREGORY, a most eminent mathematician, and Professor of Mathematics in the University of St. Andrews, and afterwards at Edinburgh. – He was the indisputable inventor of the reflecting telescope. Born in Aberdeenshire in 1638, he died at Edinburgh in October 1675. On returning home late one evening, after showing some of his students the satellites of Jupiter, he was suddenly struck blind, and in three days afterwards expired.
The ‘Preface to the Reader’ prefixed to this work is really so very clever and amusingly severe, that, for its preservation, I here subjoin it:-
‘READER, – I doubt not but thou are surprised to find me in print: and I assure you, that it is not more above your hope and expectation, then it is contrair to my former designs and resolutions: But as Atis his dumbness from the womb could not keep him from bursting into speech against those souldiers whom he saw ready to have killed his father; so my general insufficiency in all things else, cannot keep my natural affection in longer silence, when I see my bountiful Mother, this ancient and famous University, and all her beautiful Daughters, the other Universities of this Kingdom, in hazard to be murdered by one of their unnatural children.
‘And finding that he with whom I have to do, hath given but a very lame and partial account of the occasion of our debate, I judge it both thy interest and mine, that I correct it by a more full, perfect and impartial one: For as the Magicians feigned miracles found greater belief with the Egyptians, then the true ones of Moses; so а false information having nothing to contradict it, oft times prevails as true with us.
‘Thus then it is. My adversary having published his Tyrocinia Math. and his Ars Magna et Nova, &c., one here who well understands those things, intending to oblige the Author, and redeem his Countrey from further injury by his writings, friendly represented to him some of his failings in them. And another, whose judgement he ought to have esteemed much, with the same intention, expressed to one of his nearest friends, his dislike of those Books, and his regrate for the loss which the Author put himself and his Countrey to by them. But this was not sufficient to convince him of his weakness, for he proceeds to give the world another instance of his folly, in printing his Hydrostaticks; and notwithstanding what had past he yet fancies that the Masters of this University have as high an esteem of his sufficiency, as he himself: And therefore, not doubting of their encouragement to so noble a work, he confidently sends his petitory letters to some of them, intreating their own concurrence, and their assistance for procuring the encouragement of others thereto. With his Letters, he sent this following Edict:-
‘Forasmuch as there is a Book of Natural and Experimental Philosophy in English, to be printed within these four months, or thereabout; Wherein are contained many excellent and new purposes: As first, Thirty Theorems, the most part whereof were never so much as heard of before: in which are proposed briefly the chiefest and most useful principles of that new Doctrine, anent the wonderful weight, force, and pressure of the water in its own Element. There are next, Twenty Experiments in order to that Doctrine, not only most pleasant, and most easie to all capacities, but most useful likewise, which are set down after this method. First, each particular Experiment is briefly and clearly discribed, by its own distinct Schematism and Figure. Secondly, the curious Operations, and natural effects of it are shewed. Thirdly, the true causes of these natural effects are searched into, and most evidently explicated, and demonstrated; not only by the force of reason, but by the evidence of sense also. And lastly, at the close of each Experiment, you will find most naturally deduced from the preceeding Demonstrations, many excellent and new conclusions (hitherto unknown) and these for the advancement of natural knowledge, and practice, among which, mention is made of a new and more commodious way of Dyving. After all which, there is a number of Miscellany Observations; some whereof are Experiments made in Coal-sincks, for knowing the power of Damps, and ill Air, by killing of Animals. Some made for knowing the variation of the Compass here: and an excellent way for knowing, by the eye, the Sun or Moon’s motion in a second of time, which is the 3600 part of an hour, and many others of different kinds, useful and pleasant.
‘These are therefore to give notice to all ingenious Persons, who are lovers of Learning, that if they shall be pleased to advance to Gedeon Shaw, Stationer, at the foot of the Ladies steps, three pounds Scots, for defraying the present charges of the said Book, they shall have from him, betwixt the date hereof and April next to come, one of the Copies: And for their further security in the interim, the Author’s obligation for performing the same. Edinburgh, the 14 of December, 1671.
‘Which so exposed to my Masters the vanity of that confident man, that they were forced plainly to let him know their mind, as is expressed in the first Letter of his Postscript.
‘To this he returned an answer, which, although it as little deserved his superlative commendation, as their censure, was abundantly discreet for obliging them to silence, until his Book should come to light. But to show how contrair to his nature this was, it quickly repented him of his discretion; and a little after, without any such provocation, as he alledges, he alarmed this place with a flood of his fury, whereof he dischargeth himself in the second letter of his Postscript.
‘My Masters thought it unworthy of them to give any reply to this, lest by engaging themselves in a debate with one who had nothing wherewith to entertain them, except railing and calumnies, they had stained their reputation, and gained to themselves nothing but the name of foolish persons, for speaking to a fool in his folly: but I (to be ingenuous) having no much greater reputation for learning then himself, was content to hazard it against him: and knowing well his bragging humour to be such, as would make him insult and erect Trophies, if nothing were replied, I sent to him a Letter, which, to my best remembrance, was in the words following:-
‘SIR, – I admire exceedingly the forwardness of your humor (I will call it no worse) in your last to ——-: he is a person not concerned in you or in your books, neither will he ignorantly commend anything, as it seems ye expected he should have done, when ye sent him these papers. Ye might have known long ago, that he had no veneration for what ye had formerly published; for he made no secret of his mind, when he was put to it. Ye may mistake him, if ye think that any by-end will cause him speak what he thinks not: nevertheless he delivered your commission, and was willing to be inconcerned, expecting their answer. They pressed him to know his judgement of your last piece: he told ingenuously the truth, that there was none of them had less esteem for it then himself. He hopes ye are so much a Christian, that ye will not be offended with him for speaking what he thought, when he had a call to it; and yet, albeit ye seem to favour him more than others, he hath ground to look upon himself as one of the Sophistical rable, for they only are such who condemn anything ye do, the rest of the University continuing always learned persons. It is to no purpose to apologize for themselves, ye take all for granted, which ye have heard: I shall not put you to the pains of proving it; yet it seems ye would hardly have believed it so easily, had not your conscience told you, that they had some reason for their judgement, which really was this following: That they see nothing in your last piece, new and great, (albeit it be Ars nova et magna) save errors and non-sense; as your demonstrations of the Pendulum, your Nihil spatiale, your Gravitas circularis & horizontalis; your question, Whether or no a body may be condensed in a point? &c. too many to fill several letters: for ye must not call experiments new inventions, otherwise we are making new inventions every day; neither must ye call different explications new inventions, else the same thing might be invented by almost every Writer. I admire how ye question the R. Society; for I desire to know one point of doctrine, which ye or they either pretend to, concerning the weight of the air, the spring of it, or anything else in your book, save mistakes, which was not received by all Mathematicians, and the most learned of Philosophers, many years before any of you put pen to paper. Ye have been at much pains to prove that by experiment, which all the learned already grant, and some have demonstrat à priori from the principles of Geometry and Staticks, and many à posteriori from experience, if sense may be called a demonstration: Yet ye are the only man who produceth the Ars nova & magna, when all others are out of fashion. But more to your commendation, it seems ye do all these wonders by Magick; for ye have the ordinair principles of none of these Sciences: Euclid is as much a stranger, as reason in all your Books: and for this, Perque Mathematicos semper celebrabere fastus! At last ye come to prove a new doctrine, which before now was near 2000 years old, with thirty new Theorems, which must not be named, because they are of such a tender and delicat complexion, that the very naming of them will make them old. There are also many other excellent things, which will be all new when they were printed but yesterday. It is like, some of these dayes, we may have an Ars nova & magna, to prove that a piece of lead is heavier than so much cork. I know not wherefore ye undervalue any man, because he hath not as great esteem for your notions as your self: Have not we as much freedom to speak our mind of you, as ye have to write yours of the R. Society, and the University of Glasgow? The greatest hurt ye can do us, is to make Dromo famulus one of our Principals. I think it not strange that ye using only demonstrations of sense, should admire the force of our imagination, in affirming no method of Dyving so good as that of Melgim. I am sure that the man dyving for a continual time, if he be not also of your invention, must breath of the air; and this air must either be kept close by it self, as in Melgims way, or communicat with the air above. If the latter be your invention, I doubt ye must also have some Chirurgical invention to apply to your Dyver at his return, if he go to any great deepness: If the former, it is the same with Melgims; and you cannot, neither any man else help it, but in circumstances (which alters not the method) and perchance to little purpose. As for Archimedes, I am sure he wanted no necessary requisit to prove the weight of water in its own Element. I know not what else ye intend to prove: always I am as sure that he had two great requisits, which ye want; to wit, Geometry, and a sound head. As to what ye write concerning the imperfections of Sciences; the scientifical part of Geography is so perfected, that there is nothing required for the projection, description and situation of a place, which cannot be done and demonstrat. The scientifical part of Opticks is so perfected, that nothing can be required for the perfection of sight, which is not demonstrat, albeit mens hands cannot reach it; and these being the objects of the fore-said Sciences, your authority shall not perswade me, that it is altogether improper to call them perfect. In the Hydrostaticks, it were no hard matter to branch out all the experiments that can be made, into several Classes, of which the event and reason might perfectly be deduced, as consectaries (I speak not here of long deductions, as ye seem to rant) to something already published: if it be noticed but rudely (as ye, not understanding what niceties of proportion means, must do) only considering motion and rest: And I believe there is none ignorant of this, who understands what is written in this Science. Upon this account writing to you, I might call it perfect; albeit I know there are many things relating to the proportion and acceleration of the motions of fluids, which are yet unknown, and may perchance still be. Ye shal not think that I speak of you without ground; for in your Ars magna & nova, ye bring in your great attempts for a perpetual motion; all which a novice of eight days standing in Hydrostaticks would laugh at. I do not question that this age hath many advantages beyond former ages; but I know not any of them, it is beholden to you for: only I admire your simplicity in this. Astronomers seek always to have the greatest intervals betwixt observations, and ye talk that ye will give an excellent way for observing the Sun or Moons motion for a second of time; that is to say, as if it were a great matter that there is but a second of time betwixt your observations. I wonder ye tell me the eye should be added; for the invention had been much greater, had that been away. I do confess that a good History of nature is absolutely the most requisite thing for learning; but it is not like that you are fit for that purpose, who so surely believe the Miracles of the West, as to put them in print; and record the simple meridian altitudes of Comets, and that only to halfs of degrees, or little more as worth noticing. However, if ye do this last part concerning Coal-sinks well, and all the rest be but an Ars magna & nova, ye may come to have the repute of being more fit to be a Collier then a Scholar. Ye might have let alone the precarious principles and imaginary wordles of Des Cartes, until your new inventions had made them so: For I must tell you Des Cartes valued the History of Nature, as much as any experimental Philosopher ever did, and perfected it more with judicious experiments, then ye will by all appearance do in ten ages. Ye are exceedingly misinformed, if ye have heard that any here have prejudice or envy against you; for there is none here speaks of you but with pity and commiseration: neither heard I ever of any man who commended you for what he understood. As for your Latin Sentences, if they be not applied to your self, I understand them not; for here we are printing no Books, we are not sending tickets throughout the Countrey to tell the wonders we can do: We are going about the imployments we are called to, and strive to give a reason for what we say. Where then are our doli & fallaciæ, tabulæ & testes, sapientia ad quam putamus nos pervenisse? &c. In these things ye publish, ye know there is no Sophistry, but clear evidence: If ye had done such great matters in Universale & ens rationis, ye might have had a shift; but here ye must either particularize your inventions, or otherwise demonstrat your self derogatory to the credit of the Nation: For what else is it to confound R. Societies and Universities with an Ars magna & nova; and yet when ye were put to it in print, to show your inventions, all ye could say was, that the publisher should have reflected upon the wisdom of the Creator, &c. so that the Poet said well of Democrites, &c. of which I understand not the sense, except ye make your self the summus vir, and us all the Verveces. I suppose this may be the great credit that ye say ye have labored to gain to your Nation; to wit, to get us all the honrable title of Wedders. No more at present, but hoping this free and ingenuous Letter shal have a good effect upon you (for I am half perswaded, that the flattery of scorners and ignorants, hath brought you to this height of imaginary learning) and that when ye come to your self, ye will thank me for my pains. I rest,
Your humble Servant.’
‘After this I had no notice of him or his Book, until a copy of it came to my hands: which, when I had opened it, I found dedicat to a Noble Person; whose very name being there, did creat in me a greater respect for the Book, then I thought my self capable of for any of the Authors works; and made me fear some finer things in this, then any other of his Books would suffer me to ‘expect. For having known his Lordship an ornament to this Place, when his Vertue was but in blossom, I have easily given credit to that universal testimony, which reports him to have gained to himself an high esteem among Strangers, by those excellencies, which are the glory of his Family and Name; and therefore I could not but apprehend this present, offered to his Lordship on so solemn a day, to be something extraordinar.
‘But having read over his Theorems, I admired the presumptuous arrogance of the Author, in concerning the authority of so Noble a Name in so worthless a triffle: And having returned to the Dedication, to see what he said for himself, I justified his first application for Pardon, that he had perfixed his Lordships Name to the baffle and abuse of a Noble Subject. Then I considered the motives of the Dedication, and found them great; yea so great, that I wonder they did not fright him from so daring an attempt: For his Lordship, I hope, hath not given security to Strangers abroad, that he might draw upon himself injury from his Countrey-men at home; his vertues have not made an Italian shelter under his Patrociny, that this bold Scribler might be encouraged to send his Lordship through the world, as a Protector of falshood, and countenancer of such as cannot handle truth without corrupting and defiling it. Could not his Lordships Heroick vertues, and understanding mind; could not the learning and other excellent endowments of his Lordships Father, Grand-father, and Great-Grand-father; could not the Dignity of their famous Ancestors, and the Antiquity of their Illustrious Family, preserve him from the importunity of this impudent man, who will needs enlighten his dark ignorance with the splendor of his Lordships Name? Was not his Lordships being an encouragement to learning, sufficient to have kept this arrogant pretender thereto, from soliciting his Lordships authority, to his folly and infirmity? Surely, when he addressed this Book, he either little considered his Lordships abilities to judge thereof, or else he intended to court his friendship and affection, for a defence against the power of his understanding; & if he gain his design, he hath reason to say, that his Lordships goodness is proportioned to his other accomplishments.
‘After this view of the Dedication, I went through the rest of the Book unto the Postscript, where I find mention made of the Letter which I sent to the Author, who was wiser then to print it, lest thereby he had published his own shame; but he lets it not pass without a cast of his craft: For finding that by it his ignorance is discovered, he foams and rages, he is troubled in spirit, because he is disturbed in the exercise of his Art; that is, because he is not permitted to call other mens truths, his own, and his own falshoods and follies, rare and useful truths, and obtrude them upon the world as such; and being fettered with that reason which opposeth him, he, in the bitterness of his spirit, vomits out his spight against her, calling her Sophistry, Non-sense, and whatever his anger suggests to him: and breathing nothing but revenge, he calls together his choisest vertues Fury, Malice, and Boldness; and having got them to joyn with his Ignorance, he endeavors by these united forces, to uphold his cause: Nor was any of them wanting to him, as may appear from their particular achievements, which are remarkable in that review of my Letter, which summeth up his Postscript; and in sum, equally betrayes his Insufficiency and Insincerity. For therein he treateth the Masters of this University so unworthily, (as he had done in the second Letter of his Postscript, in answer to that Gentle-man, who, by direction, wrote unto him their mind) that I know nothing like it, except the spirit of its Author, and that entertainment which he in the Preface to his Ars magna, and pag. 472. gives to the late Arch-Bishop of Glasgow (who had been most kind to him) and Masters of the Colledge there, in which some then were, & yet are, who may be his teachers in any thing he pretends to.
‘But this Postscript doth not sufficiently discover the Authors vertues, and therefore he spends a part of his first Epistle to the Reader, in such flat and vulgar railings, as prove him fitter for nothing, then to hold the principality among the Street-scolders. And moreover, that the provocation may be compleat, he gives a formal appeal to any who dare state himself his adversary: and makes such ostentation of his strength and courage, that, rather then want a combatant, he will purchase one with gold; for he offers a Guiny for every Theorem which shal be everted, either in this, or his last Book. And such is his generosity, that I cannot doubt, but he will also be as noble in requiting the labor of any, who shal give him some Tyrocinia, whereby he may correct his discovered errours.
‘Sure I am, there may be as much gained here as would tempt my Adversary once again, to blot a great many sheets of paper, if to boot, he could be assured of a Crown, or Rix-dolar, or (rather then lose his market) a Legged-dolar, for every Book that should stand himself no more than two Merks.
‘Now, Reader, I am confident thou thinks me further engaged after all these provocations, then that I can retreat with honour; and so think I my self: And therefore I have accepted my Adversaries Challenge. I have examined all his Books: I have weighed them in the ballance of reason, and have found them so light, that they deserve no better name then Vanity. I have displayed the Authors infirmity and folly in every one of them, without other design then to protect my Countrey, and particularly all such as he endeavours to concern in his Writings, from the mean thoughts and misapprehensions of those who have no other character of both, then they receive from them.
‘Yet in this Review I have not displayed all the enormities of this Arrogant pretender to Knowledge; for this should have made my Book swel as far above a just measure, as his Arrogance and Insolence is above every thing, except his Ignorance; seeing every period of his Writings is either pregnant with falshood; or if it contain a truth, which he hath taken from some other, his probation thereof is either from false principles, or management so silly and childish, as makes it appear ridiculous. Neither have I taken notice of all the impertinencies whereof he is guilty, lest thereby I had hazarded the reputation of my good nature: But I have only exposed some of his grosser failings, to let the world know, that he hath not so much wit, as himself presumes; and discovered his inveterat malice, to undeceive those who think him a man of much sincerity.
‘And this I have done with so much evidence and demonstration, that I fear not thy censure, if thou be intelligent: Nor have I sent this book to your hands, under any other Patricony, then that of Reason; for she is able to recomend it to the favour of my Friends, and protect it from the Fury and Malice of my enemies. But if it were not, that the meanness of my person and station should have made my adress as indecent, as the naughtiness of my Adversaries Present made his, I would have offered it (as a testimony of my humble duty, and sincere respect) to that Noble Person, to whom he hath dedicat his Hydrostaticks; and as earnestly have solicited his Understanding to judge of my Truths, as my Adversary hath done his Lordships Friendship to accept, his Favour to protect, and his Name and Authority to convoy his falshoods through the world. Nor should I either have precipitated or suspended my adress for finding so craving an opportunity, as the day of his Lordships Birth and Majority.
‘From my Chamber in S. Andrews,
‘the 24. day of July 1672.’
It is curious to observe that with all his eagerness to heap ridicule on his antagonist, Gregory never once touches on what would now appear the most vulnerable point, the episode about the witches. After a long interval, Sinclar wrote an answer to Gregory, entitled, ‘Cacus pulled out of his den by the heels; or, The pamphlet entitled, The New and Great Art of Weighing Vanity examined, and found to be a New and Great Act of Vanity.’ But this production was never published: It remains in Manuscript in the University Library at Glasgow, to which the Author appears, from an Inscription, to have presented it in 1692.
Considerable attention seems to have been paid by Sinclar to such branches of Hydrostatics as were of a practical nature; and it has been said that he was the first person who suggested the proper mode of Draining the Water from the numerous Coal Mines in the east and south-west of Scotland. Between the years 1673 and 1674, he was employed by the Magistrates of Edinburgh to superintend the introduction of water from Comiston into the city, a convenience with which the capital of Scotland had not previously been furnished.3 In the ‘City Accounts 1673-1674,’ it is recorded, ‘Item to Mr. Geoe. Sinclare, School Master at Leith, by Gratuitie for his attendance and advyce in the matter of the Waterworks, £66, 13s. 4d.’
Apparently the ‘ARCH-BEDAL’S’ Castigation had been highly prejudicial, and must materially have injured the sale of the work on ‘Hydrostatics,’ issued in 1672; for in 1683 it was re-issued with a New Title Page, but wanting the ‘Epistle Dedicatory to Robert Viscount of Oxfuird,’ and the ‘Postscript,’ under the designation of ‘Natural Philosophy improven by New Experiments. Touching the Mercurial Weather-Glass, the Hygroscope, Eclipsis, Conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter. By New Experiments, touching the Pressure of Fluids, the Diving-Bell, and all the Curiosities thereof. To which is added, Some New Observations and Experiments, lately made of several kinds. Together, with a True Relation of an Evil Spirit, which troubled a Man’s Family for many days. Lastly, there is a large Discourse anent Coal, Coal-Sinks, Dipps, Risings, and Streeks of Coal, Levels, Running of Mines, Gaes, Dykes, Damps, and Wild-fire.’ Edinburgh, Sm. 4to. With a Dedication to ‘Sir James Fleming, Lord Provost of Edinburgh, and remanent Members of the Honourable Council of the said Burgh: In all Humility offers and dedicates this ‘Philosophical Transaction,’ in which he says, ‘I present you with a mean oblation, less than the Widow’s Mite, but with a willing mind. ‘Tis all I can afford at present… I have sometimes offered more to others, who were not so deserving. I still remember how kindly the Council treated me for some years ago, when I taught the Mathematicks at Edinburgh; and what a singular obligation they conferred upon me after, when I was employed to search out a well, which by good providence I lighted upon, which is now a Well-spring of happiness to the Good Town. I made several Observations, with a most accurate, and exact level; but especially one from the highest ground in the Castle, in the evening towards the Fountain, by the help of a light there, on the 29. of May 1674, which gave infallible assurance to the Magistrates, that the source was 200 foot higher than the Weigh-House, and great encouragement to the Council to begin the work… This work will be extant among the Annals and Chronicles of the City, of things done from year to year to all Generations, which is the glory also of the succeeding Magistrates. But your wisdom and prudence in governing the City, and composing all differences, and settling all matters every day so happily, is of far greater moment… Leith, January 9, 1683.’
In his Explanation of the ‘Hygroscope,’ he remarks that Christopherus Sturmius, a German, a great Virtuoso, and famous Mathematician, makes honourable mention of it, in his writings, which he hath taken from my ‘Ars Nova et Magna,’ as he hath done many other curiosities, and published them to the world, not as his own, but as mine: which, by the way, gives a notable check to my old Adversaries, who, with the ‘Bedells gown’ about their heads, endeavour’d to make the world, in their beggarly pamphlet believe, that all my Philosophical Experiments were Untruths and Lies… There is no cure or remedy against the biting of Slanderers… This, perhaps, may be lyable to the Pharisaick Censure, of some Mathematical Rabbi!’
Sinclar’s writings, in the opinion of a very able judge, ‘are not destitute of ingenuity and research, though they may contain some erroneous and eccentric views. The last named contained a rather strange accompaniment to a scientific treatise, – An Account of the Witches of GlenIuce, – which if there had been no other evidence of the fact, shows the author to have not been elevated by his acquaintance with the exact sciences above the vulgar delusions of his age. It must be recollected, however, that other learned men of that age were guilty of like follies.’
In 1684 Sinclar published at Edinburgh another work, under the title of ‘Truth’s Victory over Error; or, An Abridgement of the Chief Controversies in Religion, which since the Apostles days to this time, have been, and are in agitation, between those of the Orthodox Faith, and all adversaries whatsoever, &c.’ A Treatise most useful for all persons, who desire to be instructed in the True Protestant Religion, &c,’ 12mo, as his own, but which was shortly afterwards discovered to be merely a Translation of the ‘Praelectiones in Confessionem Fidei.’ – The heads of the Lectures delivered in the Divinity Chair by DAVID DICKSON, Professor of Divinity, first in the University of Glasgow, and afterwards at Edinburgh (born 1583; died 1662.) Prefixed there is an ‘Epistle Dedicatory to George Drummond of Milnenab, Lord Provost, and remanent Members of the Honourable Council of the Ancient City of Edinburgh,’ in which he remarks – ‘My first application is for pardon, that I should adventure to prefix your Names to the Frontispiece of this small Fabrick… I have sometimes appeared in publick, though not with the Gold of Ophir, and Tyrian Purpure,.. yet with oblations suitable to my ability as now, though unsuitable to your honour and dignity… The commemoration of favours which I have received from the Council, these many years bygone, have had no small influence upon me, to make this publick, yet humble address… I have made some small attempts, during the twelve years I taught Peripatetick, and Experimental Philosophy, and since for the advancement of learning among others, which have not wanted success, whereby the author hath been encouraged; especially by the kind acceptance his writings have met with from the greatest Philosophers and Mathematicians in this age, in England, Holland, Germany, and France… I do not mention this for applause, or out of vanity, but for some peculiar reasons hinted below… I move in a distinct sphere from Masters of Universities. They teach in Philosophy, the causes and reasons of things. What I write is but Practical and Mechanical, for the promoting of Natural Knowledge and Learning, as do the Virtuosi. But instead of such I present your honours with a small bundle of Orthodox Truths… I cannot but now after these weighty perswasives, make my next application for acceptance, and seriously entreat, that this little Book, if not for the value of the thing offered, yet for its design, which is that Truth may have victory over error, and for the ingenuity and affection it flows from, may be received into the tuition of your Favour, and get a full protection against the Champions of the uncircumcised Philistines, and being enlightened with the splendor of your Lordship’s name, and receiving the impression of the Councils authority upon it, may by the Lord’s blessing, be useful to young students in religion, and others too. Prefixed there is also ‘The Epistle to the Honest Hearted Reader,’ in which he goes on to remark, ‘As to what relates to the present Treatise, I am not ignorant, that many eminent and learned Divines, far beyond whatever I could profess, have beatten this path, and travelled round the world of Polemick Divinity. But their writings being so Voluminous and large, that he who desires to have a full sight at one look of the chief controversies, can no more have it, than a man from the Peak of Teneriff, can get a clear sight of the whole Globe of the Earth… Therefore I have imitated Geographers, who after they have surveyed the whole Globe of the Earth, draw Universall descriptions thereof, and comprehend the whole image… within a narrow circumference of a Card or Mapp. In so doing, I may perhaps contribute somewhat towards the satisfaction of some, who neither can nor are able, to trace the wearisome footsteps, of those eminent Divines, who have written fully. This Treatise being Historical, none can expect, but I must have consulted others, and gleaned off their writings what things were needful… The Design of this Treatise is good. The method is plain and easy, so is the stile… Let no man blame me for speaking somewhat for the truth, because another man hath spoken better. If I have said little in defence of it, I am sure I have said nothing against it… If I cannot please all men, I shall endeavour at least to please some. And if I can please none, I shall not displease myself. I hope my friends will censure favourably, if my enemies censure maliciously. I expect as many adversaries of one sort, and of another upon my top, as a travelling man hath midges and wasps about his head in a warm summer evening. There are escapes in authors, whose knowledge is far beyond any thing I can profess. No marvel then, if a malicious Critick, like a Viper from the fire of contention fasten upon a mans hand. For the author being intent upon all, cannot lay out his whole industry upon every line, which a snarling Cur will bark at. I shall take it as a favour to have Learned and Judicious men to censure me… Some perhaps may look awry upon me, because I have medled with some ticklish Questions, and been too positive in my Judgment. If any such Questions are, they have occur’d to me in the Road, which I could not pass by, without a Salutation. But as all of them have been weighed in the Ballance of the Sanctuary, so these likewise, which some may call ticklish. I durst not for a world have been positive If I had not judged them consonant to Truth, therefore let all men, whatever perswasions they be of, judge charitably: for I have said nothing upon the account of fear or favour, nor any thing which may cause division or offence… It is probable, I may be less noticed by the common Adversaries, than by some who are so vain that they glory in injuring the Merit of a Book… As the method is plain and easy, so is the stile. I use only the common and plain Arguments. Some perhaps might have expected a dilution, or answering of Adversaries Reasons. It is hard to propose them to their Palate. They complain their arguments are enervate and clipped… In confuting the Adversaries, I use no worse language than do not they err… Anno 1662, I published a little Book intituled ‘Tyrocinia Mathematica,’ for the use of my Schollars, and young Students, which was dedicated to that great Hero, John Duke of Lauderdail. Anno, 1669, I had a large Book printed in Holland, dedicated to the Earle of Winton. In the year 1672, a third was published intituled the ‘Hydrostaticks.’ Though some endeavoured to ruin the reputation of my Writings at home, yet they were not able to do it abroad. But least this peece may meet with the like welcome into the world, I shall beg liberty to cite one passage of a letter from a most intelligent gentleman, in vindication of that Book intituled ‘Ars Nova & Magna,’ against which so many flate contradictions were uttered, which the other two likewise met with. – ‘Ostend, October 10, 1670, I must not forget to tell you a passage anent your late peece. When we were at Breda, we had occasion to see Collonel Lauther, who fell in regrating that Scots Spirits were not encouraged. And told he had seen a Book lately published by one Sinclar, whereof he had a great esteem, and that many others as well as he esteemed it highly. For example, he told of a Dutchman, who is one of the French Virtuosi, that said he had seen nothing on that subject comparable to it; and it was esteemed so in France. If you have any other thing to publish, I pray you hasten it, for it will not want acceptance… In going thorow this Book… If any be too curious to inquire, why the author hath touched so many Controvesies in Religion, and yet hath medled nothing with the great Controversie of the time. I answer, I had been both officious and impertinent to have touched matters, which lay not in my way. For in all the Confession, which is the onlie Road I walk in, there is not one Mum or Syllable of the one Government, or of the other.
The Book for Paper and Character may compare with many from abroad. The Printer (John Reid) a person of special skill, hath done his dutie sufficentlie in correcting; so that I find it needless to prefix or subjoyn Errata Corrigenda. If there be any literal faults, which the most skilful Author, and best of Printers cannot prevent, let the Reader impute them only to invincible necessity.’
In 1688, another edition of this Work was issued. But the FIRST EDITION, with the author’s own name, was only printed at Glasgow in 1726, and has prefixed to it a Memoir of the Author by WODROW, who remarks, ‘The Printer of this Edition of ‘Truth’s Victory over Error,’ finding the Preface to the former Edition unfit to stand before this, as containing several Things perfectly extraneous, and personal, to the Author of it; and other Things agreeable enough to the Disguise under which it formerly appeared: Yet not so to what the printer would now have the Reader to know: He determined with himself to leave it out, and earnestly desired me to form somewhat, that might stand in the place of it… I shall drop a few Hints, as to the former Edition of this work… This Book was first published in the year 1684, by G. S. that is Mr. George Sinclare, well enough known by his several books published both in Latin and in English. What led him to translate another Man’s Book, and send it abroad under the initial Letters of his own Name, I shall not determine. I am willing to leave the ashes of the Dead in quiet, especially those of a Person, who, in his Time, was taken Notice of with some Applause by Learned Men Abroad, as well as at Home; and wrote several Things in Philosophy, Mathematicks, and History, in his own Way, not without their Use in the Time when they were published. I knew him in his old Age and declining Years, when much decayed, yet still retaining the serious and religious Dispositions I hope he had thro’ his whole Life; and tho’ I cannot intirely vindicate this low and mean Piracy, in publishing the Work of another, in such a manner; yet I hope it was his Regard to the great Truths in our excellent Confession of Faith, and his Desire that common People, in a Time when we were in imminent Hazard of Popery, a bigotted Papist being on the Throne, should be guarded against the Errors thus breaking in like a Flood upon us; that put this Good Man to take the Pains to Translate the Dictates of the Learned Professor Dickson from Latin to English. If he had the poor View of a little Glory to himself, by publishing these in his own Name, it happened to him as generally it does to self-seeking and private-spirited Persons, even in this present State their Naughtiness is discovered, and they miss their Mark: But we shall charitably suppose he had higher and better Aims. There were several Copies of what the Revd. Mr. Dickson had dictated to his Scholars, in Latin, upon the Confession of Faith, in the Hands of Ministers and others; and it came soon to be known, that ‘Truth’s Victory over Error’ was only a Translation, and the Venerable Author’s Name suppressed. This made one to dash down the following lines upon the Running Title before the Title Page in the former Edition, in pleasantry:-
‘Truth’s Victory over Error.’
‘No Errors in this Book I see,
But G. S. where D. D. should be.’
In 1685 Sinclar published at Edinburgh, ‘Satans Invisible World Discovered; or, A choice Collection of Modern Relations, proving evidently against the Saducees and Atheists of this present Age, that there are Devils, Spirits, Witches, and Apparitions, from Authentic Records, Attestations of Famous Witnesses, and undoubted Verity. To all which is added, that Marvellous History of Major Weir, and his Sister: with two Relations of Apparitions at Edinburgh.’ 12mo. To this, the FIRST EDITION, there is prefixed a curious ‘Epistle Dedicatory to the Right Honourable GEORGE EARL OF WINTON, LORD SETON and TRANENT, &c.,’ and a singularly interesting ‘Preface to the Reader,’ neither of which are to be found in any of the latter Reprints.
Shortly after publication, the Lords of the Privy Council granted to Mr. Sinclar the copyright in the Sale of this, his curious and precious production:- ‘Apud Edinburgh, 26 Feb. 1685. – The Lords of his Majestie’s Privy Councill, Having considered ane Address made to them by Mr. George Sinclair, late Professor of Philosophie at the Colledge of Glasgow, and author of the Book intitulled Satan’s Invisible Works [World] Discovered, &c.,’ Doe heirby prohibite and discharge all persons whatsomever, from printing, reprinting, or importing into this Kingdome any copy or copies of the said book, dureing the space of eleven yearis after the date heirof, without licence of the author or his order, under the pain of confiscation thereof to the said author, Besydes what furder punishment we shall think fitt to inflict upon the Contraveeners.’
This little volume has since been frequently reprinted. In the Edition of 1764 there appeared ‘Some Additional Relations which have happened in the Shire of Renfrew, Towns of Pittenweem, Calder, and other places.’
To maintain the efficacy of Witchcraft and the reality of Spirits and Apparitions was at that time (1685) a part of the external Christianity of the country, and it was a recognised part of ‘Atheism,’ as all freedom of judgment was then called, to entertain a doubt about either. The work of Mr. George Sinclar was an example of a series in which the popular beliefs on these subjects were defended as essential to Orthodoxy. For in the Language of its own Titlepage, it contains ‘a choice Collection of Modern Relations, proving evidently against the Atheists of this present age, that there are Devils, Spirits, Witches, and Apparitions, from Authentic Records and Attestations of Witnesses of undoubted Veracity.’ One of the most remarkable of these treatises was the ‘Antidote against Atheism,’ published by Dr. Henry More in 1653; in which we find, first, a most ingenious, and, for the age, well-informed exposition of the arguments for a God, from the remarkable adaptations and provisions seen throughout animated nature – next, and in close connection, a deduction of Theism and Providence, from examples of Bewitched persons, ghosts, vampires, guardian genii, &c. The heading of one of his Chapters is: ‘That the evasions of Atheists against apparitions are so weak and silly, that it is an evident argument that they are convinced in their own judgment of the truth of these kinds of Phenomena, which forces them to answer as well as they can, though they be so ill provided.’
In 1688 Sinclar published at Edinburgh, ‘The Principles of Astronomy and Navigation; or, A clear, short, yet full Explanation, of all Circles of the Celestial, and Terrestrial Globes, and of their Uses, being the whole Doctrine of the Sphere, and Hypotheses to the Phenomena of the Primum Mobile. To which is added Proteus Bound with Chains: or, A Discovery of the Secrets of Nature which are found in the Mercurial-Weather-Glass, &c., as also A New Proposal for Buoying up a ship of any Burden from the Bottom of the Sea.’ 12mo. With an ‘Epistle Dedicatory to Magnus Prince, Lord Provost and remanent Members of the Honourable Senate, of the Antient City of Edinburgh,’ in which he says, “I owe all I have, and myself too, to your Devotion and Service. I chuse rather to be doing somewhat Amiss, than doing Nothing. ‘Tis the Widow’s Mite, which I have shelter’d under the Wings of your Protection. If I should endeavour, but to recapitulat, what Sentiments, of your Kindness I have found, both Time, and my Memory would fail me. None can think, that there is any Deserving in me, which can be proportionable to those unvaluable Acts of your Bounty. If there be any, I am confident, it is too too scanty to Oblige. When I was able to do more, none were found more willing. I endeavoured indeed, according to my Capacity, to contribute my Assistance for promoving that great and noble Design, which was accomplish’d; for which the Generations to come, shall call you Happy, whom you have Enriched, with Refreshing-Streams of Cooling-Waters, more advantagious and Useful to the city, than the Fruit of the Vine. I cannot satisfie all the Obligations to Duty, which ly upon me. The more I was inclin’d to offer this Trifle, the more I was overcome with Reasons perswading to the contrary. But the uprightness of my Intention, to beautify this trivial Subject, with the Splendor and Glory of your Names, will excuse the faillings of my Understanding.’
It is curious to find science and superstition so intimately mingled in the life of this extraordinary person, and it is hardly possible to censure delusions which seem to have been entertained with so much sincerity, and in company with such a zeal for the propagation of real knowledge. At the Revolution, 1688, Mr. George Sinclar was recalled to the Charge in the University of Glasgow from which he had been expelled in 1666. At a meeting of the Committee for visiting the College of Glasgow, held on the 29th August 1690, ‘The Committee ordaint the Maisters of the Colledge to be called upon who all appeard… before whom the Committee ordaint their Instructions to be read which was accordinglie done and thereafter the Masters removed and were again callit for one after one.’
‘Mr. George Sinclare declarit himself willing to swear the Oath of Allegiance and subscrive the assurance and confession of faith and submit to the Church government, and also declarit that he was not as yett installed regent, and the Committee declarit they would recommend him to the nixt generale Meeting of the Visitation.’ On the 3rd March 1691, at a meeting of the Faculty, it is recorded that, ‘The faculty considering that many of the tacks of the Monklands and Calder are expired, and that there may be so much money gotten for grassums for renewing of the said tacks as may be a fond the interest whereof may pay six hundred merks yearly, therefore the faculty allow to Mr. George Sinclar, Professor of the Mathematicks, six hundred merks yearly, to be paid out of the rents of this University, which is all that during the present state of the College the faculty can allow him for his being Professor of the Mathematicks, hereby declaring that so soon as the revenues shall be bettered, they will be ready to augment the said salary. The faculty taking into consideration the statutes and customs of this University in regard to removing masters, and that Mr. George Sinclar was a regent of this Colledge from the year 1654 to the year 1666, and forced to demit his charge because of his non-complyance with prelacy, and that now having these two years exerced the said charge of a Regent of this Colledge, and having this day dimitted the same and accepted of the Professor of the Mathematicks, which hath a far lesse salary and profite atending the same… And the faculty being desirous to manifest their gratitude to one of their number who hath so long faithfully served this University, appoint that so soon as Mr. George Sinclar shall be removed by death or otherwayes… and that thereby there fall halfe ane years profits of his place due to him over and above the time he shall serve, that the said Mr. George Sinclar, or his assigneyes shall have payed to them for the same nine hundred merks Scots money.’
On the 23rd March 1691, there was received and recorded the Demission of his office of Regent:- ‘I, Mr. George Sinclar, one of the Regents of the University of Glasgow, considering that the Moderators of this University have by their call of this day and date, called and presented me to the profession of Mathematicks and Experimentall Philosophy in this University, and that I cannot undergoe the charge of a Regent, together with these other professions, and for deverse other good causes and considerations, have voluntarly and freely demitted,.. My said charge and office of being one of the Regents of this University to and in the hands of the said Moderators of this University to be filled and supplyed by them with any other person, as they shall think fitt: hereby quitting any claim I had, have, or can pretend to have to the said office of Regent, or to any salary belonging to the same (excepting the salary belonging to me for this present current year) for now and ever. In testimony whereof, I have subscrivit these presents written by Mr. William Dunlop, Principall of the University, with my hand at Glasgow, this tuenty-thrid day of March Jm vjc fourscore and eleven years. Before thir witnesses, Mr. Hew Fawsyd, Student of Divinity, and James Hall, Servitor to the said University. (Signed) Geo. Sinclar; Hew Fawsyd, witness; James Hall, witness.’
In the ‘Accompt of Mr. Alexander Tran, his Intromissiones with the Personage Teinds of the Subdeanrie, A.D. 1685-1691,’ it is recorded that he paid, ‘A.D. 1691, to Mr. George Sinclar, Professor of Mathematicks, his half yeirs cellarie, fra October 1691 to Appryll 1692. 200l.’
On the 19th December 1692, ‘The faculty determined that Mr. George Sinclar, professor of the Mathematics, have his publick Prelections once a week in the laigh Common Hall, on the Tuesdays, at three o’clock in the afternoon.’
And I find that on the 21st April 1696, he signed the Bond of Association by the Chancellor, Rector, Principall, Dean of Faculty, Professors of Theology and Philosophy, Students, and others of the University of Glasgow, for defending King William’s Person and Government against all foreign invasions or intestine insurrections.’
It is understood that he died in 1696, but on what day or month in that year, I have been unable to discover. In ‘Principal Dunlop’s accounts of the Annual Expenditure of the College, A.D. 1690-1698,’ it is recorded, ‘A.D. 1697, By Ballance which Mr. Sinclar was due at his Death, which the Colledge looseth, he having nothing. He had been a Regent from 1654, and was ane honest man. 170l, 16s.’
Sinclar is now best remembered by his work ‘Satans Invisible World Discovered,’ of which it has been said, ‘This important Discovery of the old Gentleman’s Cellarages and Colleauges was long a favourite with the lower classes, but it is now less popular, as its marvellous descriptions are now less credited;’ and that ‘This is a Treatise on Witches, Ghosts, and Diablerie, full of Instances, Ancient and Modern, and altogether forming a curious Record of the popular notions on those subjects at the period when it appeared. It was for a long time a Constituent part of every Cottage Library in Scotland.’
The ‘ORIGINAL EDITION’ issued in 1685 has for these last fifty years been a work of EXTREME RARITY. Indeed, of the various REPRINTS published during the eighteenth century down to that one which was issued so lately as in 1814, they have all been long very scarce and difficult to procure.
In confirmation of this, I found from personal enquiry made, that NO COPY of either the FIRST EDITION, or even of any of the various Reprints was to be found in any of the large Public Libraries established in Edinburgh!
In the latter end of the year 1830, my father – JOHN STEVENSON, Antiquarian Bookseller – purchased, at a sale of Books in the old town of Edinburgh, a very nice clean copy of the FIRST EDITION, which he offered to SIR WALTER SCOTT, Bart., at the price of FOUR GUINEAS. But Sir Walter declined the purchase, thinking it was too high in price. Afterwards it was sold to CHARLES KIRKPATRICK SHARPE, the Celebrated Antiquary, on the 12th February 1831, for the same sum. Sir Walter having apparently reconsidered the matter, sent my father the following note which is now in my possession:- ‘DEAR JOCK, – I believe I could get you a Merchant for your Satans Invisible World, dear as I think it is; and who might perhaps learn the way to your shop. If it still remains a shop-keeper, it will be worth while to send it to me. – I am, with the best wishes, Your humble Servant,
WALTER SCOTT.’
ABBOTSFORD,
17th February 1831.
Addressed ‘Mr. John Stevenson, Bookseller.’4
On receipt of this communication, my father being then confined to his bed, I replied thereto, informing Sir Walter that the book had been sold, a few days before the arrival of his note, to his friend Mr. Sharpe. My father having died on the 24th of February 1831, this was the last letter he received from his very old friend and patron. – Sir Walter Scott died on the 21st of September 1832.
Mr. Sharpe shortly after made an exchange of his book with Mr. David Laing for a collection of prints; and I understood that the said work found its way eventually – either in the form of a gift or by purchase – to Sir Walter’s possession. It is now in the Library at Abbotsford.
I may here remark that originally my father was bred a Bookbinder with Mr. Watt, Binder to the British Linen Company’s Bank, in Tweeddale Court, Netherbow, Edinburgh. On his bench or table was laid the body of William Begbie, the Bank porter, who was fatally stabbed in the close or entry leading to the Bank, on the afternoon of the 13th November 1806. He afterwards became a Bound Apprentice, as ‘Warehouseman,’ to John Ballantyne & Compy., Booksellers, Publishers, and latterly Auctioneers, No. 4 Princes Street, Edinburgh, on the 12th of May 1809, for a period of Six Years. The Indenture has engrossed on the back of it the following attestation, viz:- ‘I, John Ballantyne, ‘hereby discharge the inclosed Indenture, John Stevenson having served me for the full period of its duration, with honesty, fidelity, and a degree of assiduity rarely met with in an apprentice; not only to my own satisfaction, but so especially to that of my customers, that I may safely refer to Sir Walter Scott, Baronet, (my chief employer), were it needful, to substantiate this fact by his high authority.
(Signed) ‘JOHN BALLANTYNE,
for John Ballantyne & Coy, and Self.’
He was afterwards promoted, and continued in the business as confidential clerk, &c. until it was broken up by the death of Mr. Ballantyne, which happened at No. 10 St. John Street, Canongate, Edinburgh, on the 16th of June 1821, aged 47 years.
At the Sale of the Library of GEORGE CHALMERS (the Author of ‘Caledonia,’ &c. &c.) in London, November 1842, I purchased a very fine copy of the ORIGINAL EDITION of Sinclar’s work, in russia binding, by Kalthoeber, which I sold in the December following to JOHN WHITEFOORD MACKENZIE, Esq., W.S., Edinburgh, for the sum of THREE GUINEAS AND A HALF, in whose Library it stills forms one of the many – very many – rich rarities in Bibliography which are to be found in his remarkably fine and extensive collection.
In the preparation of this Notice, I have experienced much courtesy from Prof. William Stevenson, D.D.; John Whitefoord Mackenzie, Esq., W.S.; David Laing, Esq., of the Signet Library; Samuel Halkett, Esq., of the Advocate’s Library; John Small, Esq., of the University Library; Rev. John Laing, of the Free Church College Library, J. D. Marwick, Esq., City Clerk; and Robert Adam, Esq., City Accountant. I accordingly beg to return my best thanks to them for their kind assistance.
To this REPRINT of the ‘FIRST EDITION’ I have appended the ‘ADDITIONAL RELATIONS’ which appeared in the Edition issued in 1764; and, as a ‘SUPPLEMENT,’ a few Notes illustrative of some of the ‘Interesting and Extraordinary Authenticated Narrations,’ which I have considered well worthy of a place in such a collection as this now is.
The IMPRESSION printed has been EXTREMELY LIMITED, chiefly to gratify the wishes, and to supply the known wants, of a few Friends, Patrons, and Collectors of all such like out-of-the-way, rare, valuable, and interesting relics, – ‘The true Lovers of curious little old smoke-dried volumes,’ which are to be found in the ‘well-known shop’ of the publisher.
T. G. S.
EDINBURGH, January 1871.
–
1 ”Scott’s Fasti Ecclesiae Scoticanae.” 4to, 1867.
2 ’Concerning our Colledge-affaires, this year (1655), we had nothing but quietness… At the beginning of the year, when Mr. Robert Makquard, being unable to deal more with his charge, had dimitted, I made the Toune-Councell deall yet againe for Mr. John Glen with Mr. Patrick, but he would not hear of him, but brought one from St. Andrewes, a pedagogue, Mr. George Sinclaire, and admitted him without all competition… The matters of our Colledge this yeare (1656) were peaceable; our gallant Building going on vigorously… The Bacheller Regent, Mr. George Sinclair, almost the whole year, was dangerously sick, to the great hurt of the classe.’ – Baillie’s Letters and Journals, by Laing. Vol. iii., pp. 285, 313, 8vo, 1842.
3 The Edinburghers in the year 1621, having formed a design, to bring sweet water from the country, to supply themselves in the city with that precious element, applied to Parliament for a power to enable them to accomplish so desirable and necessary a work; which, though readily granted, nothing was further done therein till the 10th of May 1672, when the common council resolved to put the same in execution… The Edinburghers having succeeded in their application to Parliament, they sometime after contracted with Peter Brauss or Bruschi, a German, for the sum of two thousand nine hundred pounds sterling, to bring the water of Tod’s Well at Comiston to Edinburgh, in a leaden pipe of a three-inch bore, to be laid an inch deep in the ground,.. to a reservoir to be made on the Castle-Hill. The Lords of the Privy Council issued a mandate, prohibiting all persons from impeding the work, and threatening with the highest penalties those who should lift or demolish the pipes or cisterns. And as an encouragement for Brauss, the engineer, to proceed in the work with care and diligence, the Council promised him a gratuity of fifty pounds sterling, which was paid to him in the year 1681, which I take to be the time when the water was brought into Edinburgh.’ – Maitland and Arnot’s Histories of Edinburgh, 1753-88.
4 ‘The publisher, Mr. John Stevenson, long chief clerk to John Ballantyne, was usually styled by Scott ‘TRUE JOCK,’ in opposition to one of his old master’s many aliasses, viz., – ‘Leein Johnnie.’ – Lockhart’s Life of Scott, vol. iv., p. 136.
