User blog comment:Morgana High Priestess/Which reign is better: Uther's or Arthur's?/@comment-5995315-20130123002810/@comment-5102537-20130125115757

"Arthur brought this about and it ultimately worked better than Uther's style. When Arthur died the social and political structure he set up saved Camelot from chaos"

That's a point which is not clear and has not been claified on the show at all. All we saw in the finale was that Arthur failed. We have no idea about the fate of Camelot but logic tells us that after the battle at Camlann and an even more weakened Camelot, with countless magic-users and sorcerers out there and with a former serving girl on the throne - and this means that other kingdoms knew that  and probably not all of them accepted a serving girl as Queen - Camelot was exposed to any kind of enemy, sorcerers and conquerers alike.

Camelot's army was already reduced after two wars with Morgana and after the search for Morgana. Then there was Camlann which cost the army again a lot of lifes. From a logical point of view it's actually impossible that Camelot was safe and could withstand further possible attacks. Conquerers/other kingdoms and sorcerers/magical beings had no reason whatsoever to leave Camelot alone or even to support it.

Unless the show comes up with a valid reason why Camelot was safe after Arthur's death and the battle, it actually couldn't have been safe. And in the end, it was Camelot/Arthur that/who was supposed to bring the so-called Golden Age which included freedom for magic-users. The question who was the better kings refers to Camelot - and in case it fell, which would be logical (but we don't know), Uther was the better king whereas Arthur was the kinder person. There was no chaos until Morgana and Morgause first attacked Camelot with Cenred's help.

There was only peace for three years under Arthur's reign because Morgana was being held prisoner by Sarrum. Yet magic wasn't allowed and it was all only "calm before the storm".

"Being a father has nothing to do with being a strong king, but  scenes like that seem to imply that Uther was a failure as a father, and that this partly accounts for the later bloodshed."

Yes, thats what the show later wanted to tell us up to a certain extent which I found annoying because it took away Morgana's and Arthur's own personality and capability of thinking on their own. It was a very naive take on things to make a parent being the scapegoat for the children's failures and flaws. If we start this we could as well say that Uther's flaws were his parent's fault and that his parent's faults were their parent's fault... and so on. Both Morgana and Arthur were grown ups and fully responsible for their doings.

Later, in the finale, we were even told that it was Merlins fault that Morgana changed when he said that he blames himself. It was no-one's fault except of Morgana's, unless she was really a psychopath which would actually release her from any guilt since it would have been a mentally disturbance with she then was born with. What we saw on the show was the awkward attempt to blame others for Morgana's and also Arthur's failures and I never agreed with this.