Was Edward III a poor king but a good warrior?

Was Edward III a poor king despite being a successful warrior?

Not from every perspective; his Scottish record was harsh, but as king of England he generally worked within Parliament and rewarded service.

A viewer calls Edward III a poor monarch but an effective warrior. The judgment depends heavily on vantage point, especially given Edward's record in Scotland. From an English perspective, he worked through Parliament rather than sending troops against it, resisted some forms of persecution, and rewarded people who served him. His record is more complicated than either a chivalric hero or a simple military despot.