In life, John Hardyng was clearly a slippery individual. By his own account he was a spy; he was also a forger; and he appears to have been a thief as well. It is not surprising, then, that his textual legacy as a chronicler is also far from straightforward. Hardyng's Chronicle exists in two versions. The second, shorter one on which Hardyng seems still to have been working when he died, probably in 1464, is relatively well known, although no modern edition of the text has been published. The longer first version is known to exist in only one manuscript, probably the presentation copy for Henry VI, which was delivered to the king in 1457. Much of the scholarly attention paid to the two versions of Hardyng's Chronicle has focused on its literary importance. This interest is not based on the quality of the author's poetry (the work is largely in verse, in rhyme royal stanzas). Judgements on Hardyng's literary abilities are, indeed, overwhelmingly negative. It has been argued that his work is of no literary merit, his verse an exercise in ‘doggerel stupidity’. Much of the interest in Hardyng from a literary perspective centres instead on the sources on which he drew, such as Geoffrey of Monmouth and Chaucer, and on his influence upon other writers. There has also been detailed examination of Hardyng's role in developing the Arthurian tradition in England, specifically his influence on Malory's Le Morte Darthur. Hardyng has even been identified as a direct source for Shakespeare and the inspiration behind the depiction of Hotspur in Henry IV Part 1.

From a historical perspective, there are challenges as well as opportunities in using Hardyng as a source. It has to be accepted initially that the Chronicle is innately untrustworthy. It was composed to justify the English claim to suzerainty over Scotland, and historical accuracy was not allowed to get in the way of this goal. Hardyng's intention in composing his chronicle seems to have been to provide historical context and validation for his own forgeries, which purported to record submissions of Scottish kings to their English counterparts and related materials. Eighteen such forgeries have been identified and they were delivered to successive English governments in batches between 1422 and 1463.