Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 43.djvu/267

Parker 167-73). In May 1501 Flacius Illyricus wrote to Parker from Jena, stating that he had recently seen Bale, who had informed him that he had already acquired a considerable collection; Flacius at the same time throws out the suggestion that the bringing together such treasures, especially those illustrating church history, and providing for their safe keeping, is distinctly one of the duties of the state. We may fairly conjecture that it was partly in consequence of this suggestion that Parker about this time obtained from the privy council an order authorising him to 'borrow,' either directly or through his agents, all the ancient records and monuments that were in the hands of private persons. After Bale's death Parker succeeded in discovering where he had deposited his collections in Ireland, which, on the accession of Mary, the former had deemed it necessary to conceal; and, writing to Cecil, he says: 'I have bespoken them, and am promised to have them for money, if I be not deceived' (Corresp. p. 198). On the continent his agents were equally active, and he thus succeeded also in arresting that extensive exportation of invaluable literary treasures from the country of which Bale and Strype speak alike with so much pathos (, ii. 498-9). Another of his agents was Stephen Batman [q. v.], who asserts that in the space of four years he had secured no less than six thousand seven hundred volumes for his employer (see The Doome warning all Men to Judgement, p. 400). Among others from whom he received considerable assistance were John Stowe [q. v.] and William Lambarde [q. v.]; while, at Lambeth, he employed a complete staff of transcribers, and others competent to illuminate, bind, and engrave illustrations.

It is to these enlightened efforts that we are indebted for the earliest editions of Gildas, Asser, Ælfric, the Flores Historiarum, Matthew Paris, and others of our most important early chroniclers. Of these some account is given by Strype (bk. iv. c. 2), but a more critical estimate of the value of each edition is to be found in the prefaces to the recent editions in the Rolls Series by the respective editors. The extent to which Parker is to be held deserving of censure for the liberties taken with the texts of these authors, especially Asser and Matthew Paris, for which he certainly made himself responsible, is a somewhat difficult question. In the preface to Asser (fol. v.) he expressly declares that he has scrupulously abstained from tampering with the text, but this assertion is altogether incompatible with the internal evidence. Sir F. Madden was of opinion (Pref. to Matthew Paris, p. lxix) that he was deceived by the scholars whom he employed, and that the alterations were made without his knowledge. If such were the case, he paid the penalty of taking to himself credit for a larger amount of editorial labour than he was able personally to perform. The generally uncritical character of the scholarship of that age should, however, be taken into account, and we may regard it as certain that Parker would never have stooped to actual suppressio veri like that practised by his contemporary, John Foxe, in his 'Martyrology' (see, ii. 503).

One of Parker's great objects was to revive and stimulate the study of the Saxon language; and it was with this view that he printed the Latin text of Asser in Saxon characters (Pref. fol. iiii, v). He also employed John Day [q. v.], the printer, in 1566 to cut the first Saxon type in brass, and even projected the compilation of a Saxon lexicon (, ii. 514).

In the selection of his chaplains Parker was singularly happy, as is shown by the fact that no less than six of their number were afterwards deemed worthy of being raised to the episcopal bench. These were: Nicholas Robinson [q. v.], bishop of Bangor; Richard Curteys [q. v.], bishop of Chichester; Edmund Scambler [q. v.], bishop of Peterborough; Thomas Bickley fq. v.], bishop of Chichester in 1585; John Still [q. v.], master of St. John's and Trinity at Cambridge, and bishop of Bath and Wells; Edmund Guest [q. v.], bishop of Salisbury.

Though highly esteemed by Elizabeth, he was but an indifferent courtier. He shunned all occasions of pomp and parade, his natural bashfulness having been increased, according to his own statement (Corresp. p. 199), 'with passing those hard years of Mary's reign in obscurity.' He avoided the society of the great, and especially that of foreigners; and at the council-board he sat diffident and mostly silent. His modesty, however, conciliated those who disapproved his policy, and by the great majority of his contemporaries to whom the fame and prosperity of England were dear he was honoured and esteemed.

In the exercise of hospitality he was materially aided by his wife, whose tact and genial disposition signally fitted her for such duties; and Elizabeth herself, touched by the grace and courtesy of her reception when on a visit to Lambeth Palace, but unable altogether to suppress her dislike of clerical matrimony, took leave of her hostess with the oft-quoted words: 'Madam I may not call you; mistress I am ashamed to call you;