Board Thread:What If?/@comment-173.245.80.12-20140903054558/@comment-37017073-20190525231551

Brutegwaine wrote: I's concede that they were mostly going by suspicions, but Agravaine wasn't exactly subtle about manipulating Arthur and isolating him from those he loved and trusted. Gwaine had also seen him trying to kill Gaius.

He didn't really have to be subtle, though. He always waited to advise Arthur when they were alone or in private, and he was always careful to frame his advice as being what was best for the kingdom (it wasn't) and/or what Uther would do if he were in Arthur's place (it often was). While manipulative, this wasn't a crime, and more importantly it was always within Arthur's power to refuse his advice if he disagreed with it.

Arthur's tendency to disregard his own judgment in favor of his uncle's mainly stemmed from his desires for family connection and to make his father proud (both of which he understandably craved in the wake of Uther's death) and was something that he ultimately grew out of over the course of s4, with 4x07 being a critical turning point. Following this episode, Arthur begins listening to both Merlin and Agravaine, weighing their advice, and then making his own decision. He starts becoming a figure independent of either of them, which is what he should be.

He got angry and even threw a punch at Arthur and called him dumb in the episode with Cornelius Sigan. The way to expose everyone else was to reveal himself and force Arthur to see the contrast.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink, and Merlin can’t force Arthur to see anything he doesn’t want to see. When Gaius appeared to have turned traitor in 4x07, Arthur chose not to search for him because he was hurt and betrayed and didn’t want to hear Gaius’s side of the story, and he banished Gwen in 4x09 because he couldn’t bear to see her every day knowing what she’d done. (His actions and conversation with Merlin in that episode also make it clear that at this point in the series Arthur believes that a breach of trust cannot be repaired, and even when it concerns a relationship he’s fought for and been a part of for over two seasons he isn’t willing to try. This attitude in particular had to change before the reveal could benefit anyone, and Arthur doesn’t come to terms with this particular lesson until the finale, which had enough going on it as it is.)

Based on these examples, if Merlin revealed his magic Arthur wouldn’t want to hear what he had to say. He wouldn’t want to see Merlin every day knowing that yet another person he trusted and cared for had lied to him. And as King, it would be entirely within his power to ensure that he wouldn’t have to, whether by banishment, arrest, allowing him to "escape", or ordering the hundreds of guards at his disposal to forcibly remove Merlin from his presence.

Moreover, even if Arthur were willing to hear him out, the fact that Merlin has magic is not proof of Agravaine’s guilt. It gives him a basis to know the things he claims to know, but it’s still his word against Agravaine’s and that’s not enough. (The same would go for Gwaine if he were to step forward about the knife incident, as there’s no way that he could prove that Agravaine was about to kill Gaius and not just checking to see if he was still breathing like he claimed. Plus, the guards at the gate would be able to verify that Agravaine had ridden out after Gwaine and Merlin exactly as he'd claimed, and Arthur himself would be able to vouch for the fact that Gwaine hadn't had any suspicions to share about Agravaine upon their return, which could potentially make his sudden recollection seem biased or suspect considering his closeness to Merlin.)