192 replies to this topic

[Free Northman]

All of this debating is unnecessary.

The simple fact that proves that Aegon is fake, is that the real Aegon is older than Jon, and would therefore supercede Jon's claim to the Throne.

Since the entire story has been building up to Jon being revealed as Rhaegar's legitimate heir, Aegon cannot be the real Aegon. Then Rhaegar plus Lyanna = Jon is irrelevent, as is all the work that's gone into leading us to that revelation.

Aegon is therefore obviously a fake.

[Turkey Jack]

An alternative is if someone else gets a dragon say Euron using his horn, mummer as hes not targ possibly

[sarah.jenice]

I just want to say again that I think whether real or fake, Aegon is a mummer's dragon because his moves in the Game of Thrones are going to be controlled by others (mainly Varys and Illyrio), and that is what will probably put him against Dany. He may even be married before she arrives to form an alliance, maybe falling into Littefinger's game with Sansa. I think when Dany made the choice to go to Slaver's Bay and not go to Illyrio, she began forging her own way in the Game of Thrones, but I think Aegon is still very much under their control and a piece in someone else's game - not his own.

Edited by sarah.jenice, 01 March 2012 - 12:48 PM.

[Eejit]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

All of this debating is unnecessary.

The simple fact that proves that Aegon is fake, is that the real Aegon is older than Jon, and would therefore supercede Jon's claim to the Throne.

Since the entire story has been building up to Jon being revealed as Rhaegar's legitimate heir, Aegon cannot be the real Aegon. Then Rhaegar plus Lyanna = Jon is irrelevent, as is all the work that's gone into leading us to that revelation.

Aegon is therefore obviously a fake.

Meta-arguments are weak.

It isn't an issue if Aegon dies before Jon [you assume here he survives ADWD].
It fails to take into account the game of thrones -  the central theme of the books (south of the wall). The rightful king is the one who can take and hold the throne.

[Faint]

Another thought I’ve had on this issue is that I don’t think the confrontation between Daenerys and ‘Aegon Targaryen’ will be quite the pyrotechnic show everyone expects.

Daenerys has a lot to do. The “mummer’s dragon” assumes a place of small importance in the prophecies at the House of the Undying. There is also Stannis, the smoking beast, Jon Snow, etc. There simply isn’t time for a large-scale confrontation.

Also, does nobody else find it curious that GRRM did not call the sixth book “A Dance with Dragons”?

I’m telling you, the more I think about it, Aegon isn’t even a dragon, red or black.

[Turkey Jack]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

All of this debating is unnecessary.

The simple fact that proves that Aegon is fake, is that the real Aegon is older than Jon, and would therefore supercede Jon's claim to the Throne.

Since the entire story has been building up to Jon being revealed as Rhaegar's legitimate heir, Aegon cannot be the real Aegon. Then Rhaegar plus Lyanna = Jon is irrelevent, as is all the work that's gone into leading us to that revelation.

Aegon is therefore obviously a fake.

The dragon has three heads so 2 kings/husbands is not inconceivable, also I get the feeling that Dornish law will play a part as far as Jon is concerned its brought up too often in the Dornish POV to be inconsequential.

[sarah.jenice]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

All of this debating is unnecessary.

The simple fact that proves that Aegon is fake, is that the real Aegon is older than Jon, and would therefore supercede Jon's claim to the Throne.

Since the entire story has been building up to Jon being revealed as Rhaegar's legitimate heir, Aegon cannot be the real Aegon. Then Rhaegar plus Lyanna = Jon is irrelevent, as is all the work that's gone into leading us to that revelation.

Aegon is therefore obviously a fake.

I love hearing everyone's arguments and debates on both sides, and I am really hopeful that people will reply to my topic because I do care what other's have to say. I don't completely decide one thing and think everyone else is wrong, and that's it. I want to hear reasoning and debate, which is why I started the thread.

I'm sorry that you think it is unnecessary and thank you for your reasoning on why Aegon is obviously a fake, but I still want to hear what others have to say.

[Free Northman]

Eejit, on 01 March 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Meta-arguments are weak.

It isn't an issue if Aegon dies before Jon [you assume here he survives ADWD].
It fails to take into account the game of thrones -  the central theme of the books (south of the wall). The rightful king is the one who can take and hold the throne.

Nope. The impact of Jon being Rhaegar's secret heir is weakened by the prior revelation of another secret heir with a better claim than Jon.

Daenerys being the last Targaryen has never been a secret. But the existence of another LEGITIMATE heir with a stronger claim than Daenerys, will be a massive revelation.

Daenerys will wipe out Aegon and eventually he will be proven as fake.

To THEN have it revealed that her claim is actually secondary to Jon's, will have huge impact at the climax of the story.

[David Selig]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

All of this debating is unnecessary.

The simple fact that proves that Aegon is fake, is that the real Aegon is older than Jon, and would therefore supercede Jon's claim to the Throne.

Since the entire story has been building up to Jon being revealed as Rhaegar's legitimate heir, Aegon cannot be the real Aegon. Then Rhaegar plus Lyanna = Jon is irrelevent, as is all the work that's gone into leading us to that revelation.

Aegon is therefore obviously a fake.

Jon won't take the throne anyway.

Bsides, it doesn't matter in-story whether Aegon is real or not, the important thing is whether people in Westeros and especially the powerful nobles would believe that.

[Apple Martini]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

Nope. The impact of Jon being Rhaegar's secret heir is weakened by the prior revelation of another secret heir with a better claim than Jon.

Daenerys being the last Targaryen has never been a secret. But the existence of another LEGITIMATE heir with a stronger claim than Daenerys, will be a massive revelation.

Daenerys will wipe out Aegon and eventually he will be proven as fake.

To THEN have it revealed that her claim is actually secondary to Jon's, will have huge impact at the climax of the story.

I can actually sort of see this happening. Honestly, I think Aegon is doomed, whether he's real or not. That's why it wouldn't surprise me if we never get a full confirmation as to whether he's real. In the end, it won't matter, because the little shit's going to be dead.

[Free Northman]

David Selig, on 01 March 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

Jon won't take the throne anyway.

Bsides, it doesn't matter in-story whether Aegon is real or not, the important thing is whether people in Westeros and especially the powerful nobles would believe that.

Of course. But that's probably the purpose of Aegon, from a thematic perspective. To get the people to love the fake heir, and when the true heir - Daenerys kills him and takes his place, they will hate her for it.

Only for Jon to be revealed as the ULTIMATE true heir, and thereby succeed in uniting the realm against the Others.

Jon will take the throne, because like Quorin said, his honour is worth nothing compared to his duty to save the realm, and if him taking the throne is what it takes to save the realm, he will do so.

He just won't KEEP the throne. He will hand it over to someone else once the world is saved - if he still lives at the end.

Edited by Free Northman, 01 March 2012 - 12:58 PM.

[Free Northman]

Apple Martini, on 01 March 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

I can actually sort of see this happening. Honestly, I think Aegon is doomed, whether he's real or not. That's why it wouldn't surprise me if we never get a full confirmation as to whether he's real. In the end, it won't matter, because the little shit's going to be dead.

Yes, and your last line really captures the heart of it.

To virtually every reader who has suffered through the trials and tribulations of the main characters from book 1, the sudden arrival of the supposed Aegon to lord it over them all is an insult, a slap in the face.

We WANT him to die, because if he was the real heir, then Martin should have had us share his story since book 1.

He can't just rock up in Book 5 and expect to get our sympathy.

Die little shit, die.

[David Selig]

Free Northman, on 01 March 2012 - 12:57 PM, said:

Of course. But that's probably the purpose of Aegon, from a thematic perspective. To get the people to love the fake heir, and when the true heir - Daenerys kills him and takes his place, they will hate her for it.

Only for Jon to be revealed as the ULTIMATE true heir, and thereby succeed in uniting the realm against the Others.

Jon will take the throne, because like Quorin said, his honour is worth nothing compared to his duty to save the realm, and if him taking the throne is what it takes to save the realm, he will do so.

He just won't KEEP the throne. He will hand it over to someone else once the world is saved - if he still lives at the end.

See, I don't buy that. There just isn't any plausible way to convince the important people in Westeros that Jon is the true heir. None of the scenarios I've seen posted about that seem the least bit plausible to me. Howland Reed is nobody for 99.9% of the Westeros population. What other options are there? Bloodraven and bran? Nobody in the South would believe them either.

[Faint]

David Selig, on 01 March 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

See, I don't buy that. There just isn't any plausible way to convince the important people in Westeros that Jon is the true heir. None of the scenarios I've seen posted about that seem the least bit plausible to me. Howland Reed is nobody for 99.9% of the Westeros population. What other options are there? Bloodraven and bran? Nobody in the South would believe them either.

He only has to convince one person and one animal. Everybody else is immaterial.

[Apple Martini]

David Selig, on 01 March 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

See, I don't buy that. There just isn't any plausible way to convince the important people in Westeros that Jon is the true heir. None of the scenarios I've seen posted about that seem the least bit plausible to me. Howland Reed is nobody for 99.9% of the Westeros population. What other options are there? Bloodraven and bran? Nobody in the South would believe them either.

If Martin intends for people to learn the truth and believe it — which I admit isn't a given — then he's thought of a way within the story for it to work.

[Jerritus]

Or people will just gather behind Jon once shit hits the fan and Others come pouring through the fallen Wall. Jon being the leader of men, and all past allegiances sort of drop to the background and no one cares what Jon's real parentage is. He is just natural born leader, and people can see that and simply fall back in line and let him lead, no one questions his authority.


Then once shits dealt with and Others are beaten, everyone wants Jon to be the King, and he tells people to go screw themselves as he becomes a hermit.


This is sort of off topic though, so apologies :x

Edited by Ananta, 01 March 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[PatrickStormborn]

Do people really think that Jon is going to be able to unite the world against the Others? Just because he's the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna?

Faint, on 01 March 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Another thought I’ve had on this issue is that I don’t think the confrontation between Daenerys and ‘Aegon Targaryen’ will be quite the pyrotechnic show everyone expects.

Daenerys has a lot to do. The “mummer’s dragon” assumes a place of small importance in the prophecies at the House of the Undying. There is also Stannis, the smoking beast, Jon Snow, etc. There simply isn’t time for a large-scale confrontation.

Also, does nobody else find it curious that GRRM did not call the sixth book “A Dance with Dragons”?

I’m telling you, the more I think about it, Aegon isn’t even a dragon, red or black.

Martin has said that there will be a "dance of the dragons 2", which I guess was supposed to take place in ADWD but there simply wasn't enough room.

[Eejit]

Apple Martini, on 01 March 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

I can actually sort of see this happening. Honestly, I think Aegon is doomed, whether he's real or not. That's why it wouldn't surprise me if we never get a full confirmation as to whether he's real. In the end, it won't matter, because the little shit's going to be dead.

Most likely true, although I do expect Varys and Illyrio's motives may be clarified.

Apple Martini, on 01 March 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

I think you're reaching here. In any case, the puppeteers in The Hedge Knight made their own puppets, I'm pretty sure. I think we're a long way from a division of labor in the puppet business.

Maybe so. In any case Ilyrio and Varys can already be said to have 'made' YG in a figurative sense, just as they figuratively act as puppeteers.

[Faint]

It really isn't about convincing a multitude of people.  If one very small army has three dragons and another very large army doesn’t, it isn’t too difficult to figure out how that is going to go (i.e., Aegon the Conqueror).

[Val the Wildling Princess]

PatrickStormborn, on 01 March 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

Do people really think that Jon is going to be able to unite the world against the Others? Just because he's the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna?

Ehm, no, just because, so far, he is the only one who has tried to do something about it

About Aegon, I'm pretty sure there's gonna be another Dance of dragons, and to be honest I don't care if him and Daenerys kill each other, I'm all for a dragon- free Westeros.