Where does the disbelief in Aegon stream from?

[StarkofWinterfell]

Not if it's a cloth dragon, the way it is in HotU. I agree that a Blackfyre is a real dragon. imo Aegon is simply fake, not a Blackfyre, not a Targ. Introducing Aegon this late is bad enough, but if he's a Blackfyre, and if all that has to be rehashed with only two volumes left, ouch.

So he's either real, and dies too quickly to make a difference, or he's fake (not BF) and, again, dies too quickly to make a difference. The most important thing about his story could be uniting the Tyrells and the Martells on his side, against the Lannisters, and/or JonCon's greyscale changing into the grey plague, affecting all Westeros.

lol something like that.

I think GRRM can fit Aegon, real or fake, into two books, with his conclusion at the end of book 7. Plus, it lends significance to the Dunk & Egg novellas and though I hope this won't be the case, there was talk amongst the fans a few years ago that there might be 8 books to finish everything.

I actually think that by going to Westeros instead of going to meet Dany will cause postpone the fulfillment of that prophecy some. If he is the mummer's dragon, how would he matter to Dany if they never meet? It would require Dany going to Westeros now, easy enough with her dragons, but less so with her khalasar to which she will probably be occupied with for some time.

[Ser Maverick]

The "how" fits but the "why" does not.

Varys manages to smuggle out the heir to the throne and send him to Essos? Makes sense. He keeps baby Aegon with his closest ally Illyrio until a loyal friend of his father came along to look after him? I can buy it. They had him trained from birth to be a great leader and to reclaim the throne? Sure. But what does Varys and especially Illyrio have to gain by restoring the Targaryen dynasty? If Varys is such a Targ loyalist then why did he put a rift between Aerys and Rhaegar like Connington claimed. Why are Viserys and Daenerys treated as expendable pawns in this plan instead of being part of the endgame? Why did Varys send someone to poison Daenerys?

There also were some clues in the visions of the House of the Undying which could be interpreted as there being a false dragon. I will also point out the Blackfyre flag found on the Quiet Isle which rusted and changed color. I don't feel like getting into these but you should look into them if you haven't already. There's also some foreshadowing of a second Dance of the Dragons (Targaryen vs Blackfyre) and George once even blatantly said there would be a second DotD.

The clues to the identity of Aegon being false are more blatant than any other theory I've come across. I'm open to the possibility of him being legit but there so much that points the other way that I feel the burden of proof lies on the people saying he's the real deal.

To the people saying it doesn't make sense from a storypoint perspective, I have to disagree however. How many tropes does George have to break before your realize this isn't LoTR?

[HexMachina]

Oh, another point, from the World book, is that "Daeron the Daring" showed up after his death, and he was old enough to be recognisable. This gives us an example of how easily these things can be pulled off. Find anyone with vaguely similar features and a possible means of explaining how he survived his supposed death and bingo, you have yourself a Pretender

[Lord Hanna]

It might, but the point is that we first see the concept (a cloth dragon on poles) in Dany's vision, and it gets labelled as mummer's dragon later, by her when discussing the visions with Jorah. So since the very beginning, we have a stage prop, a false dragon, regardless whether it really belongs to a mummer or not.

I read a theory that the cloth dragon is Aegons bannner, not a metaphore of himself. Not sure i agree, but it is interesting.

[Ygrain]

I read a theory that the cloth dragon is Aegons bannner, not a metaphore of himself. Not sure i agree, but it is interesting.

It was indeed mentioned upthread. The idea is certainly interesting but doesn't fit with what Dany sees in the vision - a mummer's device as she later on describes it to Jorah, not a banner.

The "how" fits but the "why" does not.

Varys manages to smuggle out the heir to the throne and send him to Essos? Makes sense. He keeps baby Aegon with his closest ally Illyrio until a loyal friend of his father came along to look after him? I can buy it. They had him trained from birth to be a great leader and to reclaim the throne? Sure. But what does Varys and especially Illyrio have to gain by restoring the Targaryen dynasty? If Varys is such a Targ loyalist then why did he put a rift between Aerys and Rhaegar like Connington claimed. Why are Viserys and Daenerys treated as expendable pawns in this plan instead of being part of the endgame? Why did Varys send someone to poison Daenerys?

This. If Varys really kept the best interest of the realm in his mind, he wouldn't have fuelled Aerys' paranoia, wouldn't have acted against Rhaegar. Damn, given that he had the king's ear, he even might have prevented the murders of the Starks and the whole Rebellion.

To me, it rather seems the very opposite - that Varys worked to bring down the Targaryens, and only little Aegon's unrecognisable body gave him an opportunity to replace them.

[Fire Eater]

That guy I mentioned? You mean Lambert Simnel? As I said, the Targs ALREADY HAD ONE of him. So no, he's not. Perkin Warbeck maybe though.

Just because we haven't seen anyone sewing dragon banners and waiting for Viserys to sashay into Westeros doesn't mean it wasn't going on before he died. We only get points of view from a handful of the millions of people in Westeros. Illyrio actually may have been telling the truth.

Not that nonsense again. Elia would have had to act like it was her baby to ensure the safety of the real Aegon. A mother's instinct (in fact a HUMAN instinct) is to protect innocent children. She would have been holding the baby regardless. OF COURSE she knew! Rhaenys WAS with her mother but ran and hid in her father's rooms. There likely wasn't time to go after her.

How many kids in Flea Bottom with Valyrian looks? Almost 300 years of Targaryen kings and princes in the city, and you don't think any of them availed themselves of willing local girls? Aegon IV alone probably had a dozen bastards in King's Landing, hell he probably had a dozen just among the ladies at his court!

WOuld you mind pointing to me where it says no hostirocial figure can have more than influence despite both Tywin and Mace being references for Warwick the Kingmaker and Tyrion and Stannis being references for Richard III? Tristan Truefyre actually is being used as a parallel for Aegon. What about what Jorah said about the smallfolk regarding the game of thrones? It is clear that Illyrio was lying.

So when you find an argument you disagree with you call it "nonsense"? You're not helping yourself with that. Do you really think she would sacrifice her daughter in such a manner? She didn't need to hold him to be convincing. You think Gregor would bother with checking to see if the baby in Aegon's crib was the real deal despite having never seen him before and there likely being no other baby boys in the RK? Now, you're coming up with things that aren't in the text. Rhaenys isn't mentioned as being with her mother, and then having run. Elia wouldn't have abandoned her only remaining child in the RK during the Sack.

Still Varys had to find a boy whose parents would part with him and had full Valyrian features.

Then with the swap for Arbor gold, there comes the line "lies and Arbor gold."

[sweetsunray]

I interprete the lies visions of the HotU (slayer of lies section) as not having to do with identities being false or claim to the IT being false. 3 lies are shown, but the best lies have kernel of truth in them and use wrongly made assumptions to mislead... and then we have a lie.

It can be argued that all 3 lies in the HotU prophecy revolve around the same subject: the claims of who is Azor Ahai reborn or the PtwP.

So, for the first vision we have Stannis: 2 claims are being made about him. 1) He's the rightful king 2) he's Azor Ahai reborn (Mel made the claim). One of them is the lie, the other is truth. For me the truth is that he's the rightful king, but he's not Azor Ahai reborn. And despite being the rightful king, I don't ever see him sit on the IT.

The second vision about Aegon (the mummer's dragon): again there are 2 claims about Aegon. 1) He's Rhaegar's son Aegon 2) He's the PtwP (Rhaegar made the claim). One's the truth, one's a lie. If Aegon is not Rhaegar's son, then he's not the PtwP, which leaves us with 2 lies. Hence, Aegon is in fact Rhaegar's son, but he's not the PtwP.

The third vision involves a stone beast with wings breathing smoky fire rising from a tower (the beast described fits best with a dragon...a stone dragon). Sounds like Mel's interpretation of a dubiously sourced claim about the PtwP/Azor Ahai reborn. That the PtwP will "wake dragons out of stone". Even the prophecy has two grammatical meanings... waking stone dragons (dragons out of stone), or "dragons being woken out of something made of stone". The vision metaphorically shows both interpretations at once... a stone dragon, and a dragon rising from a stone tower. So, the third lie is about a claim regarding "waking dragons out of stone". The PtwP and Azor Ahai reborn claims attempt to use "waking dragons out of stone" as an identifier for the PtwP/Azor Ahai. So, what is the lie and what is the truth regarding this identifier?

Well either someone lies that they "woke a dragon out of stone" or it's a false-identifier. Dany actually wakes dragons out of stone dragon eggs. This is the truth. It happened. But because of it red priests and Aemon conclude she must be Azor Ahai reborn/PtwP. And that is the lie.

So, now we have neat lies/claims about PtwP/Azor Ahai, but also 3 truths.

Stannis: truth - rightful king; false: Azor Ahai

Aegon: truth - Rheagar's son; false: PtwP

Dany: truth - mother of dragons; false: PtwP/Azor Ahai

Anyway, I posted this, to make a point about the HotU vision of the mummer's dragon... be careful of using it as prophetic evidence that Aegon is fake. The HotU slayer of lies visions can be argued in the way I did above with Aegon being truly who he claims to be, because as was pointed out, even the real Aegon can still be a mummer's tool (with Varys being the mummer).

[Eddy of the Godswood]

I interprete the lies visions of the HotU (slayer of lies section) as not having to do with identities being false or claim to the IT being false. 3 lies are shown, but the best lies have kernel of truth in them and use wrongly made assumptions to mislead... and then we have a lie.

It can be argued that all 3 lies in the HotU prophecy revolve around the same subject: the claims of who is Azor Ahai reborn or the PtwP.

So, for the first vision we have Stannis: 2 claims are being made about him. 1) He's the rightful king 2) he's Azor Ahai reborn (Mel made the claim). One of them is the lie, the other is truth. For me the truth is that he's the rightful king, but he's not Azor Ahai reborn. And despite being the rightful king, I don't ever see him sit on the IT.

The second vision about Aegon (the mummer's dragon): again there are 2 claims about Aegon. 1) He's Rhaegar's son Aegon 2) He's the PtwP (Rhaegar made the claim). One's the truth, one's a lie. If Aegon is not Rhaegar's son, then he's not the PtwP, which leaves us with 2 lies. Hence, Aegon is in fact Rhaegar's son, but he's not the PtwP.

The third vision involves a stone beast with wings breathing smoky fire rising from a tower (the beast described fits best with a dragon...a stone dragon). Sounds like Mel's interpretation of a dubiously sourced claim about the PtwP/Azor Ahai reborn. That the PtwP will "wake dragons out of stone". Even the prophecy has two grammatical meanings... waking stone dragons (dragons out of stone), or "dragons being woken out of something made of stone". The vision metaphorically shows both interpretations at once... a stone dragon, and a dragon rising from a stone tower. So, the third lie is about a claim regarding "waking dragons out of stone". The PtwP and Azor Ahai reborn claims attempt to use "waking dragons out of stone" as an identifier for the PtwP/Azor Ahai. So, what is the lie and what is the truth regarding this identifier?

Well either someone lies that they "woke a dragon out of stone" or it's a false-identifier. Dany actually wakes dragons out of stone dragon eggs. This is the truth. It happened. But because of it red priests and Aemon conclude she must be Azor Ahai reborn/PtwP. And that is the lie.

So, now we have neat lies/claims about PtwP/Azor Ahai, but also 3 truths.

Stannis: truth - rightful king; false: Azor Ahai

Aegon: truth - Rheagar's son; false: PtwP

Dany: truth - mother of dragons; false: PtwP/Azor Ahai

Anyway, I posted this, to make a point about the HotU vision of the mummer's dragon... be careful of using it as prophetic evidence that Aegon is fake. The HotU slayer of lies visions can be argued in the way I did above with Aegon being truly who he claims to be, because as was pointed out, even the real Aegon can still be a mummer's tool (with Varys being the mummer).

I like this

[sweetsunray]

I like this

Thanks, I posted the theory about the 3 lies yesterday in this thread: slayer of lies

[Municipal Engines]

The emphasis on the Blackfyres in the worldbuilding and the Golden Company supporting him with a "contract writ in blood" - the original purpose of the GC was to seat Blackfyre on the Iron Throne. The difficulty and implausibility of having smuggled an infant Aegon and swapped him without Elia or anyone noticing. The whole way Varys acted during Aerys's reign - feeding his paranoia and pitting him against his son - lends support to the idea that he's always been a Blackfyre supporter.

The entire way Illyrio acts during his appearance in ADOD. His manse has boy's clothes and he is very affectionate and wistful when talking about Aegon. He mentions specifically that the male line of the Blackfyres died out and we have talk of Senna the Lysene slave girl who he loved; such a thing wouldn't be bothered to have been mentioned unless it was for something. He says "I told you, my little friend, not all that a man does is done for gain. Believe as you wish, but even fat old fools like me have friends, and debts of affection to repay." which means that he acts out of an affectionate obligation to someone with an interest in seating the boy on the throne. This quote actually lends weight to the idea that Varys is a Blackfyre, since Illyrio's debt of affection would be to fulfil the Spider's goal of having his family seated on the throne. It also might be in reference to the wishes of Senna Blackfyre.

Last and most obvious, we have the prophecy of the mummer's dragon; the fake puppet dragon (Aegon) controlled by a mummer (Varys).

[Selena]

The "how" fits but the "why" does not.

Varys manages to smuggle out the heir to the throne and send him to Essos? Makes sense. He keeps baby Aegon with his closest ally Illyrio until a loyal friend of his father came along to look after him? I can buy it. They had him trained from birth to be a great leader and to reclaim the throne? Sure. But what does Varys and especially Illyrio have to gain by restoring the Targaryen dynasty? If Varys is such a Targ loyalist then why did he put a rift between Aerys and Rhaegar like Connington claimed. Why are Viserys and Daenerys treated as expendable pawns in this plan instead of being part of the endgame? Why did Varys send someone to poison Daenerys?

devils advocate here... but ....

if I am Vareys who do I chose..Aerys who is completely mad and on the way to becoming uncontrollable or his Rhaegar..a prince who is beloved by the small folk and respected by all those who know him? That choice is easy.

Rhaegar gets himself killed and a new power sits on the throne. Now I have to make another choice. Do I chose Viserys (much younger and of a much different character then his older brother Rhaegar) or do I protect Rhaegars only son Aegon? I think this choice is easy as well. Viserys is known and will be hunted until he is found and killed so that he can not attempt to win the throne back. Aegon is a baby, easily moved out of harms way to be raised by Targ loyalist in safety and taught to be the prince his father would have wanted him to be ..to be the prince that will come back to take his rightful place on his throne.

**Daenerys would be the last option and as such would not get a whole lot of concern

[sweetsunray]

Last and most obvious, we have the prophecy of the mummer's dragon; the fake puppet dragon (Aegon) controlled by a mummer (Varys).

As I pointed out, that vision cannot be used as absolute evidence that Aegon is not Rheagar's son. Even Rheagar's son can still be a puppet controlled by a mummer. And in my interpretation of the trio of lie-visions, Aegon would actually be Rhaegar's son, but the lie is Rhaegar's claim about Aegon being the PtwP.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

WOuld you mind pointing to me where it says no hostirocial figure can have more than influence despite both Tywin and Mace being references for Warwick the Kingmaker and Tyrion and Stannis being references for Richard III? Tristan Truefyre actually is being used as a parallel for Aegon. What about what Jorah said about the smallfolk regarding the game of thrones? It is clear that Illyrio was lying.

So when you find an argument you disagree with you call it "nonsense"? You're not helping yourself with that. Do you really think she would sacrifice her daughter in such a manner? She didn't need to hold him to be convincing. You think Gregor would bother with checking to see if the baby in Aegon's crib was the real deal despite having never seen him before and there likely being no other baby boys in the RK? Now, you're coming up with things that aren't in the text. Rhaenys isn't mentioned as being with her mother, and then having run. Elia wouldn't have abandoned her only remaining child in the RK during the Sack.

Still Varys had to find a boy whose parents would part with him and had full Valyrian features.

Then with the swap for Arbor gold, there comes the line "lies and Arbor gold."

Your examples with Warwick and Richard are about ONE historical person being split between TWO characters, not two historical people jammed into one character, which is what you are arguing is going on with Aegon.

Illyrio was not talking about the smallfolk--he doesn't give two honeyed locusts what the smallfolk think.. Smallfolk do not have extra fabric to sew into banners. Smallfolk don't win wars. Armies win wars. Armies require soldiers with weapons and sometimes armor, and that takes money. Nor do they waste good alcohol toasting someone who they probably don't even know is still alive, like Viserys. It's the NOBILITY of Westeros who would be expected to support Aegon. And it's the nobility of Westeros Illyrio is talking about. Since we only get the views of a handful of the noble families, we can't verify that Illyrio was lying.

No, when I find nonsense I call it nonsense.

Rhaenys being with her mother doesn't have to be in the text because it's just plain logic. She wouldn't go and hide in Rhaegar's rooms unless she had something to hide FROM. That would be Gregor and Amory showing up in the nursery...where apparently Elia was, because she was holding the baby. Royal babies do not live in the same rooms with their mothers and one child to a room is a modern invention. Both Rhaenys and Aegon would spend most of their time in the nursery. If Elia was holding Aegon, she was in the nursery, as Rhaenys would be. And that's true even if the real Aegon is the one who died.

You think the Mountain was going to let Elia go to find her daughter? The kid could have slipped under his legs easily but he wasn't going to let the Princess and her "son" go. It was the baby first and foremost that was the target.

No she didn't need to hold him--but human instinct would demand it. People with an ounce of parental instinct hold babies, particularly when they are trying to protect them from something.

Think about this for a minute: you are in a situation where your baby has been swapped with another because there is a very real chance someone will try to kill your child; someone shows up to kill the child. Do you just stand back and say "go ahead?" No. You try to protect the innocent kid even though it isn't yours. Even if you don't particularly care if the stunt double lives or dies you know that if you don't try to protect the kid, even an idiot thug might think as far as something not being right with this picture.

Wait a minute, are you seriously thinking that if Elia had just handed the baby over to Gregor he would have let her go find her daughter? Elia was not leaving that room alive. We readers know that. Tywin says she was killed because he didn't tell Gregor not to kill her. She was never going to be able to get to Rhaenys no matter what, she was never going to be allowed the time or opportunity. The word abandon has no place in this discussion. Elia did not "abandon" her daughter to protect her son.

Again, we're talking about a city in which there could be hundreds of people who are descended from Targaryen bastards. Not hard to find a kid with Valyrian looks, and if possible, he could always send to Essos for one. And it's also not hard to find parents willing to part with their child if they need or even just want money badly enough. Even in modern times, in the real world, there are people who sell their children or put them down as collateral on loans and lose them.

Could you give me the chapter you're referring to so I can look it up? The particular reference to lies and Arbor gold, I mean.

[Ygrain]

if I am Vareys who do I chose..Aerys who is completely mad and on the way to becoming uncontrollable or his Rhaegar..a prince who is beloved by the small folk and respected by all those who know him? That choice is easy.

Funny but Varys' behaviour actually undermined Rhaegar by driving a wedge between him and Aerys.

Could you give me the chapter you're referring to so I can look it up? The particular reference to lies and Arbor gold, I mean.

“And this lie may spare us. Else you and I must leave the Eyrie by the same door Lysa used.” Petyr picked up his quill again. “We shall serve him lies and Arbor gold, and he’ll drink them down and ask for more, I promise you.” (Sansa, AFFC)

[Ser Maverick]

if I am Vareys who do I chose..Aerys who is completely mad and on the way to becoming uncontrollable or his Rhaegar..a prince who is beloved by the small folk and respected by all those who know him? That choice is easy.

Varys turned Aerys against Rhaegar, not the other way around. He also fueled Aerys' paranoia with all of his whispers. This is why Connington thinks Varys will have a lot to answer for when they take King's Landing.

Rhaegar gets himself killed and a new power sits on the throne. Now I have to make another choice. Do I chose Viserys (much younger and of a much different character then his older brother Rhaegar) or do I protect Rhaegars only son Aegon? I think this choice is easy as well.

This is kind of a confirmation bias. We know that Viserys would have been a terrible king through Dany's POV when he was an adult but there's no way of knowing what he was like as an eight-year-old. It's not like he was near Joffrey's level, and even he only came out of his shell after becoming king.

Viserys is known and will be hunted until he is found and killed so that he can not attempt to win the throne back. Aegon is a baby, easily moved out of harms way to be raised by Targ loyalist in safety and taught to be the prince his father would have wanted him to be ..to be the prince that will come back to take his rightful place on his throne.

Then why did they eventually take Viserys in anyway? Why did they not let him in on their plans, or reveal that Aegon survived? Why lead him on to think that he is the true king and to raise an army and attack Westeros on his own? Seems like an overly elaborate plan to go with just because Aegon would be better suited than Viserys.

[Hajk]

Bump

[TheOne-EyedHound]

Toooooooooo many clues, like TGC's purpose is to seat a Blackfyre on the Iron Throne. The Black dragon that Doran hands Arianne when he talks about vengeance, and the fact that it looks like Aegon is going to give them the vengeance they desire. Also the story Brienne hears about a Black Dragon sigil that was thrown into the river many years ago once the Blackfyre's choose it as their sigil, and it barely reappeared but it was now rusted red.

My main reason why I think Aegon is a Blackfyre is no clue. It's the idea of a character that first appeared on the 5th book, has little spotlight will have more claim to the Iron Throne then Dany. This would kill Dany's character because if Faegon is real, Dany would not usurp him.

[Lord Wraith]

Toooooooooo many clues, like TGC's purpose is to seat a Blackfyre on the Iron Thron. The Black dragon that Doran hands Arianne when he talks about vengeance, and the fact that it looks like Aegon is going to give them the vengeance they desire. Also the story Brienne hears about a Black Dragon sigil that was thrown into the river many years ago once the Blackfyre's choose it as their sigil, and it barely reappeared but it was now rusted red.

My main reason why I think Aegon is a Blackfyre is now clue. It's the idea of a character that first appeared on the 5th book, has little spotlight will have more claim to the Iron Throne then Dany. This would kill Dany's character because if Faegon is real, Dany would not usurp him.

Dany still has to get to Westeros to claim the throne at the rate she is going it be the end of the WoW before she even starts getting back. I doubt she will want to sit the Iron Throne when all is said and done.

[Ygrain]

This is kind of a confirmation bias. We know that Viserys would have been a terrible king through Dany's POV when he was an adult but there's no way of knowing what he was like as an eight-year-old. It's not like he was near Joffrey's level, and even he only came out of his shell after becoming king.

Actually, we have a confirmation of Viserys' character as a child from Barristan.

[Tall Tyrion Lannister!]

There's a lot of things in the Pisswater Prince story that would require a lot of foresight to make the baby switch plausible. First finding a baby that looked like a targ isn't going to be easy in Westeros. Second, how would they know that he'd be killed like that? Only way for the baby switch story to really hold up is if they thought the Wildfire was going to make him unrecognizable. It seems easier to pass off someone else as Aegon than to rely on a crazy man's plot or Gregor Clegane.