“So many contrary points of warre doe our Trumpets sound at once,” Parkercomplained of the judges' opinions about prerogative in The Case of Shipmony, that “either side take that for granted, which by the other is utterly denied.” A tumultuous decade later Parker described the “doubts, fears, and scruples” of a distressed and confused mind as a trumpet sounding “points of war so contrary” that quiet submission to the higher powers was the only sound course.

Of course, Parker's own trumpet sounded not a few contrary commands. It is not unreasonable or unhistorical to ask why. Some explanations come readily to mind. When Parker wrote on others' behalf –notably the commercial tracts and The General Junto, or the Councell of Union, almost certainly developing a scheme dearer to Sir John Danvers' heart than his own - we should not suppose Parker was committed to every view he expressed. In one case, self-evidently he was not: Mr. William Wheelers Case from his Own Relation, a tract that only money or friendship, perhaps, could buy. The proposal of The General Junto, or the Councell of Union for an extra-parliamentary council of the three kingdoms is hard to square with all Parker wrote about parliamentary supremacy in 1642; moreover, Parker's later resistance to cessions of English sovereignty (notably in Scotlands Holy War) combined with the constants of his analytical ability and his sensitivity to questions of sovereignty make it unlikely that he merely outgrew an earlier commitment.