All graphs in this paper have neither loops nor multiple edges. We use V(X) and E(X) to denote the vertex set and edge set of X, respectively. Given a graph X, the complement of X, denoted Xc, satisfies uis adjacent to v in X if and only if u is not adjacent to v in Xc.

Definition 1.1   A graph X is said to be self-complementary if it is isomorphic to its complement.

The following proposition is simple to prove so we omit its proof.

Proposition 1.2   Whenever X is a self-complementary regular graph, we have $\vert V(X)\vert\equiv 1(\mathrm{mod}\; 4)$ .

Definition 1.3   Let $S\subseteq\{1,2,\ldots,n-1\}$ such that $i\in S$ if and only if $n-i\in S$. The circulant graph X=X(n;S) of order n is the graph whose vertex set is $\{u_0,u_1,\ldots,u_{n-1}\}$ with an edge joining ui and uj if and only if $j-i\in S$, where the latter computation is done modulo n. The set S is called the connection set of the circulant.

H. Sachs [2] showed how to construct self-complementary circulant graphs of order n whenever n is a product of primes all of which are congruent to 1 modulo 4. He further wrote that there are reasons to conjecture that it is necessary that all the primes in the prime factorization of n be congruent to 1 modulo 4. He supported this statement by demonstrating the non-existence of self-complementary circulant graphs of orders n=p2e, n=pq and n=9r, where p and q are any primes congruent to 3 modulo 4, and r>5 is a prime congruent to 1 modulo 4.

D. Froncek, A. Rosa and J. Siran [1] have proved that his conjecture is true, that is, they showed that there exists a self-complementary circulant graph of order n if and only if every prime in the prime factorization of n is congruent to 1 modulo 4. Their proof is graph theoretic. In this paper, we provide a simple algebraic proof. First, some preliminary results about permutation groups are required.

Definition 1.4   A permutation group G acting on a set $\Omega$ is said to be transitive if for any $\alpha,\beta\in\Omega$, there is some $g\in G$such that $g(\alpha)=\beta$. Furthermore, if for any ordered pairs $(\alpha,
\beta)$ and $(\delta,\gamma)$, there is some $g\in G$ such that $g(\alpha)=
\delta$ and $g(\beta)=\gamma$, then G is said to be doubly transitive.

Definition 1.5   Let G be a permutation group acting on $\Omega$. If $B\subseteq\Omega$ has the property that for every $g\in G$, either g(B)=B or $g(B)\cap B=\emptyset$, then B is called a block of G.

It is easy to see that $\Omega$, $\emptyset$, and any singleton are blocks of any permutation group. They are called trivial blocks for this reason. All other blocks are called non-trivial.

Definition 1.6   Let G be a transitive permutation group. If G has any non-trivial blocks, then G is said to be an imprimitive group. Otherwise, Gis said to be primitive.

Note that if G is imprimitive, then given a non-trivial block B, there is a partition of $\Omega$ obtained by taking B and all its images under the action of G. This is called a complete block system and all the blocks have the same cardinality; the latter is frequently called the length of a block.

Definition 1.7   Let G be an abstract finite group. If every primitive group containing the regular representation of G as a transitive subgroup is doubly transitive, then G is said to be a Burnside group.

Burnside groups are nice groups for graph theory. Why? If we form any Cayley graph on a Burnside group G, then the regular representation of G is contained in the automorphism group of the graph as a transitive subgroup. Hence, if the Cayley graph is neither complete nor the complement of the complete graph, then the automorphism group must act imprimitively on the vertex set of the graph. This is especially nice for circulant graphs because of the following result telling us precisely what the blocks are.

Lemma 1.8   If n is not prime and the automorphism group Aut(X)of a circulant graph X of order n acts imprimitively on the vertex set of X with blocks of length d, then d is a divisor of n and the blocks are the sets $B_k=\{u_i: i\equiv k(\mathrm{mod}\; n/d)\}$, $k=0,1,\ldots,\frac{n}{d}-1$.

PROOF.Let B be a block of length d. Taking all the blocks belonging to the complete block system containing B, we see that this partitions the vertex set into parts all of which have d elements. Thus, d is a divisor of n.

We know that the permutation $\rho=(u_0\;u_1\;\cdots\;u_{n-1})\in \mbox{Aut}
(X)$. By the definition of blocks and from the action of $\rho$, it is easy to see that each block must be made up of vertices equally spaced n/d apart in the order in which they occur in $\rho$. This completes the proof.

The following two known results are required later. The simple proof of the second is omitted.

Theorem 1.9 ([3])   The cyclic groups of composite order all are Burnside groups.

Proposition 1.10   Let G be an imprimitive group with blocks $B_1,\ldots,B_k$ and let $\overline{G}$ denote the action of G on the set of blocks. If $\overline{G}$ is itself imprimitive with blocks $C_1,C_2,\ldots,C_{\ell}$, then G is imprimitive with blocks $B'_1,B'_2,\ldots,B'_{\ell}$, where B'iis the union of the blocks comprising Ci.

Brian &