It is quite hard to get away from the propaganda - Richard's against his so-called enemies the Queen Dowager and his family, and the Tudor's against Richard in order to strengthen their own regime.
Up to 1483 Richard was loyal and had a pretty amicable relationship with his brother and his sister-in-law and her relatives.
On Edward's death it seems likely that Hastings encouraged Richard to act and to take control due to his own poor relationship with the Queen and Dorset.
At this point the late King's council seemed to be willing to continue the government in the young King's name with no suggestion of a regency and with a speedy coronation.
The suggestion Richard had been named protector came later and was used by Richard to legitimize his early actions, however there is zero evidence that he was named as protector or regent in Edward IV's will.
The Queen was praised by the council for her willingness to compromise over the size of escort for the young King - many on the council wanted the number limiting.
Anthony Earl Rivers was amenable to meeting Richard and Buckingham ahead of arriving in London, Rivers also took his time clearly not in a rush to assume any kind of power.
The actions up to Richard's coup suggest that there was no reason to fear the accession of the new King by anyone or to fear the dominance of the Queen's brother and eldest son - the only person to be threatened by that was Hastings.
Richard's actions in arresting Rivers etc and taking custody of the King don't suggest a plan but were certainly effective. The reaction to it proves one thing that the Queen's family did not act as one and did not have the strength to counter Richard.
Richard's move to take control of the King's brother, the judicial murders of Rivers and Grey and Hastings - suggest his ambition had woken up and he realised his protectorate would be short-lived (the council was still planning an early coronation which would almost certainly see an end to Richard's control).
Hastings might have feared Dorset and the Queen but he wasn't going to see his friend's son removed from the throne.
Once Richard was King he had to remove the threats to his own reign - the series of revolts that followed his accession were initially in the name of Edward V - largely prompted by members of Edward IV's household (the men closest to him) - those would grow into the Buckingham revolt and by then the rumours the King and his brother were dead were spreading.
So basically any "suspect" has to do the deed in the Summer/Autumn of 1483 - It is possible that Richard ordered them done in, it is also possible one or both died from being kept (deliberately or not) in poor conditions perhaps, it is possible if convenient that one of both simply died of natural causes, it is also possible one or both died in a botched attempt to rescue them and the other was done in.
Up to 1483 Richard was loyal and had a pretty amicable relationship with his brother and his sister-in-law and her relatives.
On Edward's death it seems likely that Hastings encouraged Richard to act and to take control due to his own poor relationship with the Queen and Dorset.
At this point the late King's council seemed to be willing to continue the government in the young King's name with no suggestion of a regency and with a speedy coronation.
The suggestion Richard had been named protector came later and was used by Richard to legitimize his early actions, however there is zero evidence that he was named as protector or regent in Edward IV's will.
The Queen was praised by the council for her willingness to compromise over the size of escort for the young King - many on the council wanted the number limiting.
Anthony Earl Rivers was amenable to meeting Richard and Buckingham ahead of arriving in London, Rivers also took his time clearly not in a rush to assume any kind of power.
The actions up to Richard's coup suggest that there was no reason to fear the accession of the new King by anyone or to fear the dominance of the Queen's brother and eldest son - the only person to be threatened by that was Hastings.
Richard's actions in arresting Rivers etc and taking custody of the King don't suggest a plan but were certainly effective. The reaction to it proves one thing that the Queen's family did not act as one and did not have the strength to counter Richard.
Richard's move to take control of the King's brother, the judicial murders of Rivers and Grey and Hastings - suggest his ambition had woken up and he realised his protectorate would be short-lived (the council was still planning an early coronation which would almost certainly see an end to Richard's control).
Hastings might have feared Dorset and the Queen but he wasn't going to see his friend's son removed from the throne.
Once Richard was King he had to remove the threats to his own reign - the series of revolts that followed his accession were initially in the name of Edward V - largely prompted by members of Edward IV's household (the men closest to him) - those would grow into the Buckingham revolt and by then the rumours the King and his brother were dead were spreading.
So basically any "suspect" has to do the deed in the Summer/Autumn of 1483 - It is possible that Richard ordered them done in, it is also possible one or both died from being kept (deliberately or not) in poor conditions perhaps, it is possible if convenient that one of both simply died of natural causes, it is also possible one or both died in a botched attempt to rescue them and the other was done in.