Where does the disbelief in Aegon stream from?

[FearFacesNorth]

This is one topic I have never been truly fussed about. If he's real, great. Another Targ and possible dragon rider. If he's fake, great. One less player in the game that is already complicated enough.

My true wondering is why is there a disbelief in Aegon? Because I never got too excited over him (although I think I should have, he might be very interesting in pages to come) I never paid much attention to him so I never found any hint towards any ingenuity. What do you base your belief about Aegon Targaryen on?

[Lord Lannister]

My disbelief in Aegon is based in Varys and Illyrio's actions. Why would they bother with Viserys and Dany, whose heritage are beyond question, if they had Aegon who had a better claim the whole time? I think when Viserys and Dany fells into V/I's hands they scrapped the fake Aegon plan and only turned back to it when Viserys got himself killed and Dany exiled herself to Slaver's Bay and was beyond reach.

[Beorn Snow]

Mostly it´s because I think the whole Blackfyre backstory must matter.

Not that there aren´t some irrelevant worldbuilding history-created in any fantasy series. I don´t expect all of Maegor´s wifes to symbolize something or there to be some foreshadowings in every random branch of published familytrees.

But since we have Dunk and Egg, since Varys and Illyrio seem to be acting weirdly. I mean, why didn´t Varys just try to use his influence, secrets for blackmail to put Illyrio up as master of coin, like Tyrion concludes when he meets Illyrio, it´s not just about coins or power.

[Nyrhex]

Firstly it comes from the fact that doubts over Aegon are also expressed in the books.

Secondly it seems too much playing the trope of the hidden prince.

Thirdly, and most importantly, it plays the hidden prince trope again, and people already have favourites. If Aegon is legit, his claim is superior to Jon's, let alone Dany's.

[TheLightning Lord]

He has a better claim than Jon. B)

In all seriousness there are quite a lot of of hints he might not be who he claims to be, and then there's the whole baby swap stuff, some think it's far fetched.

I think (and hope) he's real myself. Although I'm probably just in denial....

[Beorn Snow]

I fear we will never know for sure.
For me the biggest hint is the Golden Company joining without a question. We have Brynden Rivers from Dunk&Egg series also shaping events of ASOIAF, Bran´s journey and probably lots of other stuff in the north, and probably working against his archrival Bittersteel, the founder of Golden Company.

Sometimes I wonder if the Blackfyres don´t have a better claim. History tends to repeat itself with GRRM, and colours matter: Blackfyres are black, which perhaps makes Daeron (who was the better king if not the best claim) and Brynden the greens in a way. (And isn´t Brynden a bit green?).

[Septon Oberyn]

Firstly it comes from the fact that doubts over Aegon are also expressed in the books.

Secondly it seems too much playing the trope of the hidden prince.

Thirdly, and most importantly, it plays the hidden prince trope again, and people already have favourites. If Aegon is legit, his claim is superior to Jon's, let alone Dany's.

What do you mean plays it again? What other hidden prince? I hope you don't mean Jon

[Nyrhex]

What do you mean plays it again? What other hidden prince? I hope you don't mean Jon

I did mean Jon, since it's pretty heavily hinted at in book 1, and Aegon only shows up in book 5, with doubts about him before we even finish the book, and heavy hinting that he is at most a dragon of a different color. Aside from that there are also the Stark boys which were presumed dead and will make a comeback, possibly one or more of Robert's bastards, Quentyn Martell was this to Dany for about five seconds, etc.

[GtrGbln]

Short answer: Jon Snow fans are ridiculous.

[Hangover of the Morning]

I think the burden of the proof is on the party that claims that a well-guarded royal baby, whose corpse was paraded in front of many reliable vitnesses, and who's murder has never been considered suspicious has in fact escaped and been living in exile for nearly two decades, when there's no witnesses to the baby swap or any items/documents that could prove his identity.

Until then I am sticking to the much more likely official version that the real baby Aegon was murdered by Gregor Clegane.

The overall shadiness of those running the show doesn't add to the credibility either. Neither Varys nor Illyrio are as far as we know famous for their altruism or loyalty to House Targaryen given how they treated Danny and Viserys. They could have saved Rhaenys and Elia too or raise Aegon with Viserys and Danny and thus avoid the doubt about his parentage all together. The fact that they need to create chaos and paint Aegon as the saviour in order for people to believe in his legitimacy (power resides when men believe it resides) speaks volume about their scam.

Quaithe's prophecy about the mummer's dragon and so much emphasis on the Backfyres lately just seals the deal for me.

[Septon Oberyn]

I did mean Jon, since it's pretty heavily hinted at in book 1, and Aegon only shows up in book 5, with doubts about him before we even finish the book, and heavy hinting that he is at most a dragon of a different color. Aside from that there are also the Stark boys which were presumed dead and will make a comeback, possibly one or more of Robert's bastards, Quentyn Martell was this to Dany for about five seconds, etc.

Any argument based on assuming a theory is true (in this case R+L=J) is inherently flawed. R+L=J is not confirmed.

[JonSnow4President]

First, real Aegon requires trusting Varys, which is stupid (at least, on its own. He's trustable if you can find other support).

Second, the mummer's dragon thing.

Third, real requires some illogical actions from some of the players at the time to make it happen.

[Visenya Stark]

I thought he was fake even before I read the Blackfyre theory. Illyrio's behaviour was just too suspicious. Viserys and Dany are left to fend on their own, meanwhile Aegon gets an education and people to look out for him. Why the discrimination among Targaryens? The Blackfyre theory convinced me fully.

[kimim]

In HotU, Dany is shown a cloth dragon used by mummers--false dragon, stage prop. This is in the bit of prophecies where Dany is called the "daughter of death," with the implication, imo, that she will be in an adversarial relationship with this cloth dragon.

Quaithe warns Dany about a "mummer's dragon," in Dance. Again, mummer's dragon is a false dragon, a stage prop.

Varys supports Aegon, and Varys started out life as a mummer. He is a skilled actor in the novels, great at changing his shape, his voice, even his smell. That makes Aegon the mummer's dragon, a cloth dragon, a stage prop: False dragon.

[Selena]

probably reading too much into it..but knowing how GRRM has based the books on true history I always felt (f)Ageon was an ode to the Princes in the Tower, just rolled into one character. Young Griffs back story is quite on point with Lambert Simnel's (the first pretender) and "Ageon"s story towards the end of ADwD is pretty similar to Perkin Warbecks (and Warbeck was even acknowledged by his "aunt" Edward IV's youngest sister Margret just to mess with Henry VII..which may be a clue for WoW)

[Codename: Nymeria]

I'm gonna throw in the meta-argument (spoiler alert?) and say that

1) doesn't really seem to fit with the whole epic cycle to introduce what would presumably be a completely central character more than halfway through the series. Think about LotR - Gandalf really isn't super-primary in the first book (once Frodo leaves the Shire, he doesn't re-appear until Rivendell), but we still have the whole scene with him at the beginning, because epics introduce their key players early on. On the same token...

2) (f)Aegon isn't in the TV series. This is predicated on the assumption that the series is intended to end at the same place where the books are, which I'm comfortable making. Kinda like Lady Stoneheart; I'm fairly certain, in the books, she's having Freys killed in Winterfell right now, but doesn't exist in the series, because that whole sub-plot isn't going to affect the endgame. Likewise, the lack of Aegon in the show suggests to me he isn't part of the endgame, which you would think he would be if he was really "the blood of the dragon" and all.

3) I've gone back and forth on a couple of forums on this, but it seems to at least some of us that Varys & Illyrio's "plan" involves too many variables and assumptions for them to have spent all that energy trying to put Viserys/Dany on the throne when they really wanted it for Aegon.

I think the burden of the proof is on the party that claims that a well-guarded royal baby, whose corpse was paraded in front of many reliable vitnesses, and who's murder has never been considered suspicious has in fact escaped and been living in exile for nearly two decades, when there's no witnesses to the baby swap or any items/documents that could prove his identity.

As a lawyer, I can appreciate the "burden of proof" argument, but to be fair, I don't think Westerosi have birth certificates. I know there's the family books that allowed Ned to figure out the whole Joffrey's father thing, but even if he is wielding Blackfyre, or has Rhaegar's Harp, or something else, I would just as easily assume it's been supplied by V&I to sustain the illusion. Which is the ultimate point, I think - it seems more logical to assume that Varys & Illyrio are up to something that works to their benefit (be they secret Blackfyres or no) rather than just incredibly, incredibly strong Targaryen loyalists who concocted a whole crazy, multi-pronged plan for the good of the "realm" of whatever.

[Farstrider]

The Golden Company's support of Aegon could indicate that he is a Blackfyre, rather than Rhaegar's son. His name is really Aegon, it's just that he's not the son of Rhaegar.

[Fire Eater]

Short answer: Jon Snow fans are ridiculous.

That is completely untrue. If you did your HW instead of basing your answer on assumptions you would find that the false Aegon theory has been around since before ADwD came out, posited by Apple Martini. Aegon does share resemblanced to Henry VII, and also Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck, both false pretenders claiming to be slain princes. Besides, the only evidence we have of Aegon being rule are the words of two proven liars, Illyrio and Varys. The baby swap story doesn't make sense either.

[Paxter Redwyne]

Mummer's dragon can be also interpreted as dragon who belongs to mummers.

[AryaGonnaEatThatDeadFatGuy]

Think about LotR - Gandalf really isn't super-primary in the first book (once Frodo leaves the Shire, he doesn't re-appear until Rivendell), but we still have the whole scene with him at the beginning, because epics introduce their key players early on. On the same token...

JRRT also doesn't have Bilboa decapitated at the end of Fellowship so I think comparing the series' is unjust. IMO, GRRM is just as creative (or at least 80 years of copy-cats have skewed my opinion) and we should not hold him to the standard fantasy tropes.

And for everyone that says it hurts Jon's claim... Do you all forget he is still a bastard? Unless Rhaegar wrote a similar note to Robb's, Robert Baratheon probably had the better claim. I don't know where bastards v distant cousins stands in the line but every Cat chapter makes it seem like pretty far