#when i think abt merlin analysis on royals i dont see them as individuals anymore

[tiodolma]

My take on this is that merlin betrayed arthur’s kingship or rule of law/governance. By not revealing to Arthur the truth about how magic existed in his kingdom (from merlin himself, to morgana’s struggles, to gaius’s suffering, to the circumstances of Arthur’s own birth) he denied Arthur the potential to be the “King of Everybody including Magic” that he was supposed to become.

I think beyond personal loyalty or whatever... Merlin crippled the kingdom and helped plunged it into war because of his and Gaius reluctance to give up the most needed information: that somebody magical was protecting Camelot from the inside using magic.

This would have been so useful against people who wanted to invade or magical sisters that were keen to exercise their legitimate claim to the throne. It would have been a key to peace. Arthur not having access to that trump card crippled him as a monarch/political figure.

Arthur was negotiating under a false sense of security, that Camelot could still be safe even without magic (which was very much untrue.) Without that information, Arthur failed diplomatically in all aspects regarding magic. And that’s a shame because he had been trained since birth to be a diplomatic and peaceloving king in the first place.

Then imo Merlin was a key component of why Golden Age refused to happen, despite him working desperately and blindly towards it.

Another thing

Arthur and Uther administrations still had a justice system. They still put criminals on trial even for treason. These criminals were still allowed to speak and plead their case in public, even under Uther. Merlin denied Arthur this executive power every time he and Gaius decided to be the judge and executioner themselves.

That I think is a more serious betrayal. Merlin and Gaius deserved to be punished for that. No matter how “morally correct” (in their heads) their extremist acts of killing treasonous threats for the sake of the crown were, if the end result still made the seat of government weaker and more dumb then it’s just a violent display of power and unecessary subjugation. It’s a kind of destabilization in its own right.

Vigilanteism makes a joke of a government’s justice systems. Merlin’s acts, if they had been revealed fully, showed a Might Makes Right philosophy that proves to a lot of people that Arthur’s power, role and brand of justice eventually meant to nothing loyalists like Merlin in the long run.

Then can you call Merlin a true loyal supporter? If Merlin was a true friend and truly loyal to Arthur, then he would not have allowed the lies and moral degradation and dehumanization to his own character go too far and too long.

Merlin was beyond loyalty. He was a Fanatic.

And i think to Arthur a fanatic like Merlin would either be the most dangerous threat to his kingdom (coz he has proven that he didnt care for the justice system) or the best weapon he can have against anyone who opposes the government (coz he didnt care for the justice system).

Either way, Merlin was a loose cannon. If he snaps then even Arthur and everyone he loved could still be in danger.

I believe that Merlin owed Arthur and Morgana his secret (and if not, then enjoy the end that we got, it's the consequence), but at the same time I do not think that it was betrayal of Arthur at the end. It was a fatal mistake, a failure, a tragedy, cowardice, but:

Betrayal — the act of not being loyal when other people believe you are loyal

If just being magical is disloyalty for Arthur, then it's bad news for Camelot. Being a magician, Merlin's true nature is not a deception and not a betrayal. It's his personality. Arthur there is not entitled to Merlin's very being. Or the disloyalty is hiding the truth for 10 years? Then I perhaps agree 😗