User blog comment:Morgana High Priestess/Which reign is better: Uther's or Arthur's?/@comment-5102537-20130120000027

Me? What have I done? :-D

Well, I suppose not so many people would agree with us here. Needless to say that I do. Though it's not so easy to tell who was the better king. From the more modern point of view, Arthur was a better king when it came to mercy and kindness. However, in those dark ages, such traits were often seen as a weakness. And as the finale proved, in the end Arthur failed because he was too naive, and despite his goodness (though he could be quite cruel at times) he didn't manage to gain all the necessary allies that were willing to go to battle for him. And he didn't unite the lands of Albion. Actually, the alliance of the Five Kingdoms obviously fell apart when he was king, which indicates that he wasn't respected by the others. Which, again, proves that such traits were seen as a weakness.

On the other hand, Uther failed too. True, he failed because of his love for Morgana, and if he had suceeded in eradicating magic, this wouldn't have happened. Sadly, this would have meant to either  kill his daughter (which he wouldn't have done and didn't do, as was evident) or to take away her magical powers with those slugs, for example. None of this happened simply because he gave up his fight against magic the moment he realised that Morgana hated him and that she had magic.

Before all these events, Uther led Camelot much better than Arthur did. He kept more than two decades of peace, united the Five Kingdoms, brought peace, stability and prosperity to the land and was respected by others. Even Cenred was afraid to attack Camelot even when Uther was out of his mind because of the mandrake root. As a king who was able to hold his power and to protect his kingdom, Uther was perfect - until Morgana turned against him. His love for her was his ultimate weakness. However, he still had Arthur and had trained him to be the king that a rich and powerful kingdom like Camelot needed. It was Arthur's naivity that led to the final failure - and his kindness and lack of direction made too many others disrespect him.

One of the reasons why he never had a chance to clarify things with Morgana is the fact that he simply never really tried. He never talked about her, probably didn't even think about her and he never tried to set things straight. Uther, on the other hand, tried it when he was at odds with Morgana. He didn't succeed and neither would Arthur have succeeded with her, but at least Uther tried whereas Arthur just ignored her. He only talked a few sentences with her when they met on a quite bitter note and in dangerous situations, but there was no attempt to make peace with her whatsoever. As a matter of fact, it always seemed as if he would feel nothing for her.

Arthur's failure has many reasons, and I'm sure some of them weren't actually intended by the show runners but occured due to plotholes and some weird writing. But all in all, he was a lot weaker than Uther was, he was very easy to be manipulated and he didn't actually know what was right or wrong or what he wanted. Others noticed that.

As for hating magic, I understand why both did. Uther had very good reasons and I suppose only Morgana and Igraine would have been able to change his mind (and actually, his condition in season four had already demonstrated that he changed). Arthur had good reasons too, yet he was extremely fickle and undecided - and by embracing those who had magic, Mordred in this case, he opened the door for betrayal and for the prophecy of his demise to came true. And given that Morgana was only insane and power-hungry, even lifting the ban of magic wouldn't have changed her. Arthur was doomed from the beginning. And almost everything that he managed to achieve was because of Merlin's help. The Round Table and the marriage with Gwen didn't contribute just anything to a success or to prevent the downfall of Camelot.