and confiderable learning, raised himself to the bishopric of Oxford, was born in Sept. 1640, at Northampton, where his father, John Parker, then practifed the law. John had been bred to that profeffion, in one of the Temples at London [s]; and, fiding afterwards against the king, was preferred to be amember of the high court of justice in 1649, where he gave fentence against the three lords, Capel, Holland, and Hamilton, who were beheaded. During Oliver's ufurpation, he was made an affiftant committee-man for his county. In 1650, he published a book in defence of the new government [T], as a commonwealth, without a king or houfe of lords. In June, 1655, when Cromwell was declared protector, he was appointed one of the commiffioners for removing obftructions at Worcester-houfe in the Strand, near London, and was fworn ferjeant at law next day. In Jan. 1659, he was appointed by the Rump-parliament one of the barons of the Exchequer; but, upon a complaint against him, was soon after difplaced. However, he was again made regularly ferjeant at law, by the recommendation of chancellor Hyde, at the first call after the return of Charles II. In the mean time, he took care to have his fon Samuel, the fubject of the prefent article, educated among the Puritans at Northampton; whence, when prepared for the university, he was fent to Wadham-college in Oxford, and admitted, in 1659, under a Prefbyterian tutor. Here, according to his former breeding, he led a ftrict and religious life, entered into a weekly fociety, then called the Gruellers [u], who fafted and prayed, and met at a houfe in Holywell, where he was fo zealous and conftant an attendant upon prayers, fermons, and facraments, that he was esteemed one of the most valuable young men in the univerfity. He took the degree of B. A. Feb. 28, 1660. Upon the Restoration, he hesitated a little what fide to take; but, continuing to talk publicly against Episcopacy, he was much discountenanced by the new warden, Dr. Blandford. Upon this he removed to Trinity-college, where, by the prevailing advice of Dr. Ralph Ruthwell, then a fenior fellow of that fociety, he was refcued from the prejudices of an unhappy education, which he afterwards publicly avowed in print [x], Hence he became a zealous Anti-puritan, and for many years acted the part of what was then called a true fon of the church. In this temper, having proceeded M. A. in 1663, he entered into orders, reforted frequently to London, and became chaplain to a nobleman; continuing to difplay his wit against his old friends the Prefbyterians, Independents, &c. In 1665, he published "Philofophical Effays," and was elected a member of the Royal Society: but he made a further ufe of these Effays, by dedicating them to Sheldon archbishop of Canterbury, who became his patron; and in 1667 made him his chaplain. Being thus put into the road to preferment, he left Oxford, and refided at Lambeth, under the eye of his patron; who, in 1670, collated him to the archdeaconry of Canterbury, in the room of Dr. Sancroft, afterwards archbishop. In Nov. the fame year, putting himself in the train of William prince of Orange, who visited Cambridge, he had the degree of D. D. conferred upon him there. In Nov. 1672, he was inftalled prebendary of Canterbury; and had the rectories of Ickham and Chatham in Kent, conferred upon him by the archbishop about the fame time. As he maintained an unreferved obfequioufnefs to the court, during the reign of Charles II. fo upon the acceffion of his brother to the throne, he continued in the fame fervile complaifance; and it was not long beiore he reaped the fruits of it in the bishopric of Oxford, to which he was nominated by James II. on the death of Dr. Fell in 186, being allowed to hold the archdeaconry of Canter u in commendam. He was alfo made a privy counsellor [Y], and conftituted, by a royal mandamus, prefident of Magdalen-college in Oxford [z]. But thefe favours were the price of his religion, which he did not fcruple to offer up as a willing facrifice to his ambition. In this new change, he became one of the Romish mercenaries, proftituting his pen in defence of tranfubftantiation, and the worship of faints and images. The Papists, it is certain, made fure of him as a profelyte; one of whom tells us, that he even proposed in council, whether it was not expedient, that at least one college in Oxford fhould be allowed to be Catholics, that they might not be forced to be at fuch charges, by going beyond the feas to ftudy. In the fame fpirit, having invited two Popish noblemen, with a third of the church of England, to an entertainment, he drank the king's health, wishing a happy fuccefs to all his affairs; adding, that the religion of the [Y] Rapin's Hiftory of England, vol. ii. folio edition. [z] See an account of the whole proceedings in this important affair, which was the principal step to king James's lofs of the crown, in a pamphlet, entitled, " An impartial relation of the whole proceeding, &c. in 1688," 4to, and in the general Hiftories of England." Proteftants Proteftants in England feemed to him to be in no better a condition than that of Buda was before it was taken, and that they were next to Atheists who defended that faith [A]. So very notorious was his conduct, that the cooler heads among the Romanifts condemned it as too hot and hafty. For instance, father Peter, a Jefuit, and privy-counsellor to king James, in a letter to father la Chaife, confeffor to Louis XIV. writes thus: "The bishop of Oxford has not yet declared himself openly; the great obftacle is his wife, whom he cannot rid himself of; his defign being to continue a bishop, and only change communion, as it is not doubted but the king will permit, and our holy father confirm; though I don't see how he can be farther useful to us in the religion he is in, because he is fufpected, and of no efteem among the heretics of the English church: nor do I fee that the example of his converfion is like to draw many others after him, because he declared himself fo fuddenly. If he had believed my counfel, which was to temporize for fome longer time, he would have done 'better, but it is his temper, or rather zeal that hurried him on to it [B]." Accordingly we find his authority in his diocese to have been fo very infignificant, that when he affembled his clergy, and defired them to fubfcribe an "Addrefs of Thanks to the King for his Declaration of Liberty of Confcience," they rejected it with fuch unanimity, that he got but one clergyman to concur with him in it [c]. The fact is too notorious to be denied [D]. But the general character, given him by the fame writer, will be read, as all of his drawing are, with a proper referve and caution, when he represents him to be a man of no judgement, and of as little virtue; and as to religion, rather impious; that he was covetous and ambitious, and feemed to have no other fense of religion but as a political intereft, and a fubject of party and faction. He feldom came to prayers, or to any exercifes of devotion; and was fo lifted up with pride, that he grew infufferable to all that came near him. No doubt, the ill fuccefs he met with, in pufhing on the defign to introduce Popery, ruined him, as well as his royal mafter; the latter lofing thereby his crown, and the bishop his life: for, falling into contempt with all good men, trouble of mind threw him into a diftemper, of which he died unlamented [E], at Magdalen-college, March 20, 1687. After all, however, it is [A] Rapin, Echard, under the reign of king James. [B] Third collection of papers relating to the prefent juncture of affairs in England. London, 1689, 4to, p. 10. [c] Burnet's Hiftory of his own Times, vol. ii. [D] See Complete Hiftory of England, vol. iii. edit. 1719, p. 490, note [c]. [E] Dr. Wm. Nichols's Defence of the Church of England, edit. 1715, p. 169. C4 certain certain that he sent a "Difcourfe" to James, perfuading him to embrace the Protestant religion, with a "Letter" to the fame purpose, which was printed at London in 1690, 410, He wrote feveral other pieces (F], in all which, Burnet allows, there was an entertaining livelinefs; though at the fame time he accompanies that favourable opinion, as his manner was, with a "but it was neither grave nor correct." Yet Dr. Nichols's remark cannot be difputed, and may be extended to the prefent time, "that he has but few readers at this day;" and Swift obferves, that Marvell's remarks on Parker continued to be read, when the book which occa fioned them was long ago funk. He left a fon of his own name, who was an excellent scholar, and a man of fingular modefty. He never took the oaths after the Revolution. He married a book feller's daughter at Oxford, where he refided with a numerous family of children; to fupport which he published fome books, mentioned below [G], with a modest "Vindication" [F] The titles of thefe, befides what have been already mentioned, are as follow: I. Tentamina phyfico-theologica de Deo, &c." lib. ii. 1665, 4to. An account of it is in Phil. Tranf. No. 18. It was answered in a book, entitled, "Of the Bulk and Selvidge of the World, by N. Fairfax." 2. "A free and impartial Cenfure of the Platonic Philofophy: To which is added, An Account of the Nature and Extent of the Divine Dominion and Goodness, as they refer to the Origenian Hypothefis, concerning the pre-existence of Souls," 1666, 4to, 1667, 8vo. This laft was cenfured in a piece, entitled, Deus Juftificatus, or the Divine Goodnefs vindicated and cleared, against the Affertions of abfolute and inconditionate Reprobation." 3. "A Difcourfe of Ecclefiaftical Polity, &c. 1669, and 1679," 8vo. To which an answer came out, Infolence and Impudence triumphant, &c. 1669;" and another, "Truth and Innocence vindicated, being published, &c. by Dr. John Owen." 4. A Defence and Continuation of Ecclefiaftical Polity, (against Dr. Owen), Lond. 1671," 8vo. 5. "Tolération difuffed, &c. 1670," 4to. 6. A Difcourfe in Vindication of bishop Bramhall and the Church of England, from the fanatic charge of Popery, &c." This was prefixed to a "Treatife" of the faid bishop, written in his own defence, 1672, 8vo. A droll cenfure of this piece being published by Andrew Marvell, in a book, entitled, "The Rehearsal tranfpofed, &c." our author, in the fame hu morous tafte, wrote " A Reproof to the 13. [G] They are, 1. "An English Translation of Tully de finibus, 1702," 8vo. In the preface he has fome animadverfions upon Locke's Effay concerning human underftanding. 2. "An Abridgement of the Ecclefiaftic Hiftories of Eufebius, Socrates, Sozemen "Vindication" of his father. One of the fons of this Parker was, till very lately, a bookfeller at Oxford, where he died at a great age. PARKINSON (JOHN). Of this ingenious English botanist, one of the first and most industrious cultivators of that science among us, the memorials that remain are very scanty. He was born in 1567, was bred an apothecary, and refided in London. He rofe to fuch reputation in his profeffion as to be appointed apothecary to king James I. and, on the publication of his "Theatre of Plants," he obtained from the unfortunate fucceffor of that prince, the title of Botanicus Regis primarius. The time of his death cannot be exactly ascertained, but, as his Herbal was published in 1640, and it appears that he was living at that time, he must have attained his 73d year [H]. Parkinfon's first publication was, his 1. "Paradifi in Sole Paradifus terreftris, or, a garden of all forts of pleasant flowers, which our English ayre will permit to be nurfed up: with a kitchen-garden of all manner of herbes, roots, and fruits, for meat or faufe, &c. &c. Collected by John Parkinfon, apothecary, of London, 1629," folio, 612 pages. In this work the plants are arranged without any exact order: nearly 1000 plants are feparately defcribed, of which 780 are figured on 129 tables, which appear to have been cut exprefsly for this work. Parkinfon was, it is conceived, the firft English author who feparately defcribed and figured the fubjects of the flowergarden; and this book is therefore a valuable curiofity, as exhibiting a complete view of the extent of the English garden, at the beginning of the laft century. It may, perhaps, be neceffary to inform the reader, that Paradifus in Sole, is meant to exprefs the author's name, Park-in-fun. 2. In 1640 he published his "Theatrum Botanicum; or Theatre of Plants, or an Herbal of a large extent: containing therein, a more ample and exact history and declaration of the phyfical herbs and plants that are in other authors, &c. &c." London, folio, 1746 pages. This work had been the labour of the author's life, and he tells us that, owing to "the difaftrous times," and other impediments, the printing of it was long retarded. Dr. Pultney is of opinion that, allowing for the defects common to the age, Parkinfon will appear "more of an original author than Gerard or Johnfon, independent of the advantages he might derive from being pofterior to them. His theatre was Sozomen, and Theodoret, 1729. " 3. "Bibliotheca Biblica, or a Commentary on the five Books of Mofes," extracted chiefly from the fathers, in 4to. He alfo published a Latin manufcript of his father, containing the hiftory of his own time, under this title, "Reverendi admodum in Chrifto patris Samuelis Parkeri epifcopi de rebus fui temporis commentariorum libri quatuor, 1726," 8vo. Of which two English translations were afterwards publifhed. [H] Pultney's Sketches of the Progress of Botany, vol. i. p. 139. carried |