The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones Khal Drogo Figurine
Game of Thrones Khal Drogo Figurine
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

Why does everyone think Aegon is fake v.2


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
551 replies to this topic

#41 Tini

Tini

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,556 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:19 PM

I don't think Viserys would have bent the knee to Aegon, ever - he would have believed Aegon to be fake because acknowledging Aegon would have cost him everything. The Iron Throne.

In all the baby switch theories, has anyone considered that Aerys himself might have ordered the switch? We know that Aerys refused to let Elia and the children leave King's Landing, hostages to keep Dorne in line. So says Jaime Lannister, who was a Lannister hostage and never a trusted advisor. It did not matter if Elia and the children were at court as long as nobody knew that they left.

I can see Aerys arranging for Aegon's safety but not for Rhaenys or Elia's. After Rhaegar died, Elia of Dorne's only remaining value was as a hostage. Rhaenys was just a girl, and Targaryens did not value their daughters highly. Aegon was his heir. I can see Elia keeping quiet about the switch if it was ordered by Aerys, I can't see her keeping quiet about it otherwise.

Then it would also make sense that Aerys refused to send his grandchildren and their mother to safety. Because his heir Aegon was no longer in King's Landing, not in danger. It would even explain how Varys got involved with Aegon - Rhaegar didn't trust Varys but Aerys did, so Aerys might have entrusted the boy to Varys.

#42 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

I don't think Viserys would have bent the knee to Aegon, ever - he would have believed Aegon to be fake because acknowledging Aegon would have cost him everything. The Iron Throne.

In all the baby switch theories, has anyone considered that Aerys himself might have ordered the switch? We know that Aerys refused to let Elia and the children leave King's Landing, hostages to keep Dorne in line. So says Jaime Lannister, who was a Lannister hostage and never a trusted advisor. It did not matter if Elia and the children were at court as long as nobody knew that they left.

I can see Aerys arranging for Aegon's safety but not for Rhaenys or Elia's. After Rhaegar died, Elia of Dorne's only remaining value was as a hostage. Rhaenys was just a girl, and Targaryens did not value their daughters highly. Aegon was his heir. I can see Elia keeping quiet about the switch if it was ordered by Aerys, I can't see her keeping quiet about it otherwise.

Then it would also make sense that Aerys refused to send his grandchildren and their mother to safety. Because his heir Aegon was no longer in King's Landing, not in danger. It would even explain how Varys got involved with Aegon - Rhaegar didn't trust Varys but Aerys did, so Aerys might have entrusted the boy to Varys.


This is plausible, but it has the same issues most other theories about what happened have--it's going to be virtually impossible to validate without some sort of Deus ex Machina. If this theory is correct, we're back to being left with nothing but Varys' word and Aegon's familial traits as evidence. We've heard of no Howland Reed type situation where its explicitly stated that someone else, someone ostensibly trustworthy, knows the truth. Following the Sack of Kings Landing, the trail of baby Aegon is known to just one man, a notoriously dishonest man to boot, before he supposedly shows up on a different continent in the care of a foreign Magister. Why wouldn't Aerys send along another known loyalist, such as Ser Willem Darry, as he did with his wife and remaining children? Why leave everything entirely to one man whose credibility is so shaky? Again, it's not an implausible theory, but it raises questions and there's no clear path within the narrative for it to be verified.

#43 Usurper's Dog

Usurper's Dog

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:57 PM

We've heard of no Howland Reed type situation where its explicitly stated that someone else, someone ostensibly trustworthy, knows the truth.


I hear this argument frequently - its true that for now there isn't any verifiable evidence that Aegon is in fact the first-born son of Rhaegar. What I rarely see discussed is the possibility of this evidence potentially surfacing. Any intelligent person playing the game of thrones would understand that eventually the true Aegon would need something to prove his legitimacy. I think that we'll finally see some new revelations re Aegon's true parentage.

Edited by Usuper's Dog, 16 November 2012 - 01:58 PM.


#44 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 02:28 PM

I hear this argument frequently - its true that for now there isn't any verifiable evidence that Aegon is in fact the first-born son of Rhaegar. What I rarely see discussed is the possibility of this evidence potentially surfacing. Any intelligent person playing the game of thrones would understand that eventually the true Aegon would need something to prove his legitimacy. I think that we'll finally see some new revelations re Aegon's true parentage.


It's not impossible, but it would have to be deftly done by GRRM to not reek of Deus ex Machina, it would have to be something so subtley imbedded in the narrative (either previously or eventually) that it would come off seamlessly (or amount to a major disappointment). Obviously not impossible, but if its this subtle, then I'm again left with the conclusion that its meant to be ambiguous, at least at this point, if not indefinitely.

This is a double-edged sword too, as without any evidence of this hidden evidence, it could just as easily go the other way. In fact it's easier to bring to mind potential evidence that someone across the Narrow Sea might turn out more closely related to the Blackfyres line than the main Targaryen line, such as the sword Blackfyre. Of course, even this wouldn't constitute particularly strong evidence. If the Golden Company is backing Aegon, and the Golden Company has Blackfyre, it wouldn't be shocking for them to give the sword to Aegon either way.

#45 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 02:35 PM

I hear this argument frequently - its true that for now there isn't any verifiable evidence that Aegon is in fact the first-born son of Rhaegar. What I rarely see discussed is the possibility of this evidence potentially surfacing. Any intelligent person playing the game of thrones would understand that eventually the true Aegon would need something to prove his legitimacy. I think that we'll finally see some new revelations re Aegon's true parentage.


As to the point about what "any intelligent person" would do, we've been lead to believe nothing other than Aegon's escape was completely improvised by Varys. He may have been planning it as a contingency to some extent, but in the midst of battle, his resources would have been limited. Getting Aegon out safe, if indeed he did, would have been a much higher priority than finding some element that could prove his legitimacy decades later.

#46 Usurper's Dog

Usurper's Dog

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 03:09 PM

As to the point about what "any intelligent person" would do, we've been lead to believe nothing other than Aegon's escape was completely improvised by Varys. He may have been planning it as a contingency to some extent, but in the midst of battle, his resources would have been limited. Getting Aegon out safe, if indeed he did, would have been a much higher priority than finding some element that could prove his legitimacy decades later.


I have a somewhat different interpretation of the final days/months of Aerys II's reign. I don't think we've been lead to believe that it was some last-ditch, improvised effort.

We all know that much has been made regarding the PTWP and its relation to Aerys/Rhaegar's line. Rhaegar's fascination with the prophecy is not kept a secret, and even if there was little friendship between Varys/Rhaegar, the spymaster would easily have known the details surrounding the PTWP situation. There was of course little time between Rhaegar's fall at the Trident and Ned's/Tywin's armies descending upon KL, but we know that following the Battle of the Bells, the tide of the war was turning in favor of the rebels.

I see Aegon's extraction from KL as part of the larger plan, previously put in place (whether it was by Rhaegar, Varys, Elia, or even Aerys, as some have speculated) as THE end-all/be-all contingency in the event the Targaryan dynasty fell. Varys, if we grant him noble intentions with regards to saving the realm, would have recognized the importance in fulfilling the prophecy of which Rhaegar so firmly believed (I mention Varys because he's the only one without a blood relation, so his motives are suspect). I feel most people who believe in a FAegon do so because they so heavily doubt Varys' intentions - they see FAegon as nothing more than a tool of two low-born foreigners attempting to meddle in Westerosi politics.

Edited by Usuper's Dog, 16 November 2012 - 03:09 PM.


#47 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 04:31 PM

Also plausible, but again, just to reiterate, I'm not trying to argue that Aegon is real or that he's not, simply that his parentage is a designed ambiguity--not a mystery mind you, but an ambiguity (Jon Snow's parentage is a mystery). It's possible to construct equally strong arguments (or perhaps better put, equally weak arguments) on both sides.

We all know that much has been made regarding the PTWP and its relation to Aerys/Rhaegar's line. Rhaegar's fascination with the prophecy is not kept a secret, and even if there was little friendship between Varys/Rhaegar, the spymaster would easily have known the details surrounding the PTWP situation. There was of course little time between Rhaegar's fall at the Trident and Ned's/Tywin's armies descending upon KL, but we know that following the Battle of the Bells, the tide of the war was turning in favor of the rebels.


A couple points here. First, I don't necessarily think the Battle of the Bells or even the Trident were points at which a plan would have been enacted to help the Prince escape, if there was such a plan. At this point, the Royal family was still safe in the Red Keep, one of the most defensible castles in Westeros, and probably the easiest to escape from once under siege, with it's labrynths of tunnels and escape routes. The thing that would have triggered such immediate action was Tywin's arrival and decision to sack the castle after being granted entry. If this hadn't happened, the remaining members of the royal family could have defended a siege for weeks, if not months or more than a year, making preparations for the future even if they knew their immediate cause was lost, and eventually escaping through hidden tunnels.

We do know that Varys was, at the very least, suspicious of Tywin's timely arrival, advising Aerys not to admit him, so he had a bit more time to prepare for the Sack than others. But it's not clear whether he knew Tywin's intentions, or was merely suspicious of them. At best, he would have had from the time that Tywin began his march from Casterly Rock to the time of his arrival at King's Landing (after the Trident was over) to find a child of age with Aegon who, who looked similar enough, and whose parents were willing to give him up, and that's assuming Varys would immediately gain information that Tywin was not only on the move, but also his intentions. More likely, whatever information he had took some time to get to him, and he may not have been fully aware of Tywin's plan to arrive under a peace banner only to attack the city.

As for the issues of the prophecy, we're lead to believe that Varys is firmly anti-magic. Even if this was another lie, we're given no indication he's interested in prophecy. It's still possible he was devoted enough to the Targaryen line to support their actions that were the results of belief in prophecy, but again, there's not much to suppor this besides speculation.

#48 Usurper's Dog

Usurper's Dog

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:31 PM

I agree on the overall point of ambiguity. We may never know the truth and it most likely doesn't even matter. The reason that I focus on the idea of more advanced preparation to preserve the Targaryan heir, however, comes from seeing Cersei's preparations as Stannis made his way toward KL.


If this hadn't happened, the remaining members of the royal family could have defended a siege for weeks, if not months or more than a year, making preparations for the future even if they knew their immediate cause was lost, and eventually escaping through hidden tunnels.


Despite the fact that they (the Lannisters) held one of the most defensible castles in Westeros, and despite the fact that they could withstand a protracted siege and also make new plans for the future, Cersei still felt it necessary to remove Tommen from the city and send him to Rosby. Therefore, even if Stannis had breached the city and executed the king, the heir to the throne would be protected. We consistently see GRRM create parallels between Westeros' past and present, in my mind this lends evidence to the idea of advanced preparation.

And re Varys and the prophecy - I was referring more to his devotion to the Targaryan line, rather than his belief in magic/prophecy.

Edited by Usuper's Dog, 16 November 2012 - 06:33 PM.


#49 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:56 PM

I agree on the overall point of ambiguity. We may never know the truth and it most likely doesn't even matter. The reason that I focus on the idea of more advanced preparation to preserve the Targaryan heir, however, comes from seeing Cersei's preparations as Stannis made his way toward KL.




Despite the fact that they (the Lannisters) held one of the most defensible castles in Westeros, and despite the fact that they could withstand a protracted siege and also make new plans for the future, Cersei still felt it necessary to remove Tommen from the city and send him to Rosby. Therefore, even if Stannis had breached the city and executed the king, the heir to the throne would be protected. We consistently see GRRM create parallels between Westeros' past and present, in my mind this lends evidence to the idea of advanced preparation.

And re Varys and the prophecy - I was referring more to his devotion to the Targaryan line, rather than his belief in magic/prophecy.


That's true about how the way the Lannisters handled Stannis's siege, but there are some key differences.

1) The Lannisters never had a chance to raise a local host in the Crownlands. The Targaryens did. While this may not be particularly relevant, since most of that host was deployed to meet Robert in the field at the Trident, they almost certainly had greater numbers defending the castle.

2) Robert's host, though considerably larger than the remaining loyalist forces, was bloodied from multiple battles. In fact, during the Sack, most of Robert's host hadn't even arrived yet. Robert himself was injured, and Ned Stark went ahead with a splinter force, presumably with the intention of preparing a ground siege--cutting lumber in the Kingswood, building rams and siege towers, assessing the enemy force, etc.

3) Stannis had a far superior naval force, something Robert sorely lacked. Taking the Blackwater was always a key to Stannis's ability to fight and win a quick and bloody battle. Stannis himself actually waited on the opposite bank of the Blackwater for quite some time before his naval force arrived, and he had a headache dealing with some guerrilla tactics in the Kingswood from Tyrion's clansmen. Had he not had this naval force, the entire perception of the battle would have been completely different. They would have first had to breach the outer walls of King's Landing, then defeat loyalist forces on the streets of Kings Landing piecemeal as they moved their forces inside (rather than Tywin's 12,000 men being admitted to the city straight away, and not to mention all the caches of wildfire hidden around the city), then get all of their siege equipment inside the city walls, up Aegon's Hill, and to the Red Keep, breach the Red Keep's outer walls, and finally breach Maegor's Holdfast.

4) The Lannisters did not know the secrets of the Red Keep. Presumably, after Maegor I killed the men who built the Red Keep, it's secrets were passed down through the main Targaryen line. They knew how to escape if they had to, where the weakest points were, where the tunnels lead. The Lannisters had no such advantage. Their defense was much more improvisational, and once Maegor's Holdfast was breached, they were doomed.

#50 SicBoy

SicBoy

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:15 PM

I personally don't see why a "contingency plan" would be necessary to explain Aegon being spirited away. It's easier for me to believe that Varys just realized the precarious situation they were in and acted alone to save the Targ heir. He likely didn't have time to get the entire family out and of course the heir is the first choice. To me it seems clear that Varys has always been a Targ loyalist. And the most convincing evidence for me that Aegon is real is Varys speech in the epilogue, he had no reason to lie to a dying man. It is of course possible that Rhaegar had a plan just not as likely because it's more complicated than Varys acting alone. To me it always seemed like Rhaegar didn't expect to defeat Robert on the Trident. I think it was Barristan who said he would come back from summerhall singing of the death of kings and the twilight of kingdoms. Barristan said he couldn't help but think he was singing about the destruction of his own house. I always thought of Rhaegar as sort of a melancholy guy with a sense of doom. I imagine him riding out to meet Robert because it was his duty but with the thought that the fall of his house was inevitable.

#51 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:42 PM

I personally don't see why a "contingency plan" would be necessary to explain Aegon being spirited away. It's easier for me to believe that Varys just realized the precarious situation they were in and acted alone to save the Targ heir. He likely didn't have time to get the entire family out and of course the heir is the first choice. To me it seems clear that Varys has always been a Targ loyalist. And the most convincing evidence for me that Aegon is real is Varys speech in the epilogue, he had no reason to lie to a dying man. It is of course possible that Rhaegar had a plan just not as likely because it's more complicated than Varys acting alone. To me it always seemed like Rhaegar didn't expect to defeat Robert on the Trident. I think it was Barristan who said he would come back from summerhall singing of the death of kings and the twilight of kingdoms. Barristan said he couldn't help but think he was singing about the destruction of his own house. I always thought of Rhaegar as sort of a melancholy guy with a sense of doom. I imagine him riding out to meet Robert because it was his duty but with the thought that the fall of his house was inevitable.


I agree with the point about Varys, it's very much the Ockham's Razor explanation of what happened, and I agree that the best evidence that Aegon is real is Varys' speech to Kevan, but I still do feel it's designed to open up ambiguity once Aegon and his party land.

I disagree that Rhaegar knew he was riding to his doom, however. At least, that didn't appear to be the way he was thinking as he said his departing words to Jaime. He was talking about the things he had not done and the things he would have to do when he got back and how he would reveal some of his plans to Jaime when he returned, which obviously at the very least indicates he didn't expect to perish.

#52 Usurper's Dog

Usurper's Dog

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:18 PM

The epilogue of ADWD is absolutely the most compelling evidence for the legitimacy of Aegon - Varys had literally no reason to lie to Kevan as he lay dying. He even afforded him a certain amount of respect in his final moments, even deeming him "a good man in service to a bad cause". This, however, does nothing to discourage the conspriacy theorists who would rather see the epilogue as a vindication of their beliefs in Faegon - "Varys was lying to Kevan so the little birds didn't know the truth, he never uses his last name, etc." These people believe that Varys is even too untrustworthy to believe a word of his wholehearted soliloquy to the man he just murdered in cold blood - despite the mountains of evidence placing him as a Targaryan loyalist. These same people argue that Varys/Illyrio only used Danny/Viserys as tools to distract from their real play on the throne - Faegon - except Varys was the reason that Jorah saved Danny from an assassination attempt. Same with Barristan who was sent by Illyrio. This lends more evidence to a high degree of loyalty from Varys and Illyrio. They easily could have let Danny be murdered, countless times.

I personally don't see why a "contingency plan" would be necessary to explain Aegon being spirited away.


In regards to my phrasing of a "contingency plan" - that could be something as simple as Rhaegar saying to the small council prior to the Trident, "If I fall at the Trident - get my family the F out of here." I don't necessarily mean that it was some elaborate plan, just that the survival of the heir was always the priority when it came to defending the realm - even higher than the defense of KL, in my opinion (thinking long-term of course).

Edited by Usuper's Dog, 17 November 2012 - 08:24 PM.


#53 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 03:30 PM

The epilogue of ADWD is absolutely the most compelling evidence for the legitimacy of Aegon - Varys had literally no reason to lie to Kevan as he lay dying. He even afforded him a certain amount of respect in his final moments, even deeming him "a good man in service to a bad cause". This, however, does nothing to discourage the conspriacy theorists who would rather see the epilogue as a vindication of their beliefs in Faegon - "Varys was lying to Kevan so the little birds didn't know the truth, he never uses his last name, etc." These people believe that Varys is even too untrustworthy to believe a word of his wholehearted soliloquy to the man he just murdered in cold blood - despite the mountains of evidence placing him as a Targaryan loyalist. These same people argue that Varys/Illyrio only used Danny/Viserys as tools to distract from their real play on the throne - Faegon - except Varys was the reason that Jorah saved Danny from an assassination attempt. Same with Barristan who was sent by Illyrio. This lends more evidence to a high degree of loyalty from Varys and Illyrio. They easily could have let Danny be murdered, countless times.


I agree with most of this, and while I do think GRRM wants the reader to be leaning towards the notion that Aegon is legit right now, I still think he's got it set up to be wide open for ambiguity going forward. We're going to hear a lot about how a good portion of the Westerosi nobility rejects Aegon's legitimacy in TWoW, and there are going to be strong arguments on this side as well. And again, the best evidence we're left with is the testimony of one of the most notoriously dishonest men in Westeros. The fact that he held firm to his testimony to man who was dying is all well and good (and for the record, I'm about halfway through my second read of ADwD right now, so I'm yet to go back over this passage), but it's hardly conclusive. It would have been pretty trite for him to reveal his "master scheme" just for the sake of the reader, and as far as I can remember, it's not as if Kevan's dying words are an attempt to interrogate Varys on the truth of his claims. While Varys doesn't have any incentive to lie to Kevan, he also doesn't have any incentive to tell him the truth, he could just as easily be maintaining a well practiced lie for the sake of having no reason to do otherwise as he could be stating facts.

#54 Meddler

Meddler

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:01 AM

Also, as to Illyrio and Vary' behavior towards Viserys and Dany, while Varys may have instructed Jorah to prevent Dany's assassination in AGoT, what Illyrio tells Tyrion in ADwD paints a different picture.

"If truth be told, I did not think Daenerys would survive for long amongst the horselords," [Illyrio said].

[snip]

"....Had I not taken the precaution of posting guards at her door, Viserys might have undone years of planning," [Illyrio said].
"He sounds an utter fool."
"Viserys was Mad Aerys son, just so."



While Varys and Illyrio obviously gave support to Viserys and Daenerys, there's also obviously more going on here than meets the eye. They saw how hot-headed and petulant Viserys was, and had no expectation that Dany would survive her marriage to Drogo. They also kept Aegon hidden from his aunt and uncle, and encouraged Viserys to go along with a plan they had very low expectations for, and one that involved moving him halfway across the continent in the wrong direction whether it succeeded or not.

While none of this is specifically probative towards Aegon's legitimacy, it is probative against the notion that Varys and Illyrio are "pure" Targaryen loyalists. Their support of Viserys and Daenerys was not unconditional, and was far from on the up-and-up. They treated them much more like assets than members of a family they felt sincere loyalty towards.

Edited by Meddler, 19 November 2012 - 12:01 AM.


#55 gingerpunk

gingerpunk

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 08:00 PM

As I said, all conspiracy theories tend to meander into the mundane and twist everything to fit their "stories". I didnt say Ashara drunk moontea. I clearly said that Martin has clearly described the preferred method of taking care of unwanted pregnancies and that is moon tea. Therefore one can argue that if a character is presumed to have been raped she would have drunk moontea and resolved the problem then and there rather than waste time on the hi-jinx you describe.


You should never say "all" of anything or anyone behaves a certain way. In my experience, generalizations are never true, simply because they try to cover too broad an area to ever really be true.

The title of the thread is "Why does everyone think Aegon is fake?" and my simplest answer would tend to be that he was introduced too late in the story to be the main character. If Aegon Targaryen is legitimately the son of Rhaegar Targaryen, then Aegon Targaryen is the rightful heir to the Iron Throne. Would this make Aegon more important in regards to the story than characters we have been following since GoT? Not necessarily, but this implies that the Iron Throne has littler to do with the story than we previously believed. Entirely possible that the red herring is the Iron Throne itself and not Young Griff, but, after rereading ADwD again during my week without power, I had a new thought about the identity of Aegon.

I find it best to keep an open mind about all these open ends we're facing. There is really no sense in arguing with one another. Some of us badly want Aegon to be real (I generally don't think he is, but I do like him well enough, and really like the idea of Rhaegar's son having escaped the same fate as Caligula's daughter), some of us really don't like the idea of Aegon's legitimacy, presumably because a legitimate Prince Aegon causes problems for characters we've come to love and support. Ultimately, there is one answer, and only Martin knows it. Putting aside any feelings I might have regarding Aegon's legitimacy, I tried to keep an eye out for context clues of who he may be during my reread of the book. They are subtle, but they are there. Knowing how Martin likes to mess with us, they may be meaningless, but here are the things we know from ADwD and earlier books that may give clues as to Aegon's true identity:

1. The Golden Company has been known to support the Blackfyre Targaryen line, leading many to believe Aegon a Blackfyre.

2. Illyrio Mopatis tells Tyrion that the Blackfyre line is extinct through the males but that there are known female Blackfyre descendants.

3. Jon Connington and Aegon both believe that Aegon is Rhaegar's son. Potentially meaningless, as both can be deceived, but it bears mentioning.

4. Illyrio and Varys seem to both want Aegon on the Iron Throne. Is this because Aegon is the legitimate heir, or is there some other reason. It seems that these are two of three characters whose motives you want to question most thoroughly (the other being Littlefinger.)

Now, here is where I venture into speculation regarding context clues:

We know that Aegon has the Targaryen look, and is about the right age to be Rhaegar's son. We also know that the Blackfyres are an offshoot of the Targaryen line, so would presumably have the same look. If women descendants of Blackfyres still exist, it seems that these genetic traits could be passed on through them.

There is a point when Tyrion notices that Illyrio has a strange demeanor regarding Aegon. He brings the boy a chest of his favorite candy, and seems to regard him with sadness. It is possible that this doesn't mean much at all. Maybe Illyrio had the boy with him before he gave him up to Griff, maybe he regards him as a son. I'm leaning towards another explaination, though.

Maybe it's a long shot, but we know that Illyrio was very fond of his second wife, Serra. We also know Serra had blue eyes and "golden hair streaked with silver." We have not heard any mention of a child being born of the union between Serra and Illyrio, and nor would we, if recent events had made Illyrio decide to place his son, who has noticeable Targaryen features, upon the Iron Throne. Just an idea.

#56 SicBoy

SicBoy

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:35 PM

Just a couple points/observations I'd like to make

1. People don't like that Aegon showed up in the fifth book and can potentially be the true heir. There are still at least two more books to come. That is quite a lot of story left. Aegon can very well be legit and his story reconciled with our beloved major characters.

2. I however can't seem to reconcile Varys and Illyrios somewhat contradicting plans regarding Dany Viserys and Aegon. Did he want a place for all three of them? Were Dany and Viserys pawns? Or a sort of backup plan? There are so many contradicting lines like someone mentioned above Illyrio saying he didn't think Dany would last long among the dothraki. Though at some point he also said the plan was for them and the dothraki to meet up with the Golden Company and join their strength etc. Any explanation I've some across has been too convoluted. This is one mystery I'd like to see resolved.

3. Nobody trusts Varys but I think one of the few, straight forward, true things he's said was that he truly serves the realm.

#57 eivers

eivers

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:47 PM

To me it comes down to good story telling. The idea that after all this time Aegon is alive and the only sources of his legitimacy are a spymaster known to be untrustworthy and an exiled lord who was friends with Rhaegar. We don't really even know how much contact Jon had with Aegon before he was exiled. Considering his focus on Rhaegar I really doubt he ever gave Aegon more than a passing glance. And in the end it probably doesn't even really matter. Lords wanting more power will throw in with him regardless of whether he actually is who he says is, along as he can increase their power and wealth they won't care.

Edited by eivers, 19 November 2012 - 10:09 PM.


#58 Apple Martini

Apple Martini

    The Snarker on the Wall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,751 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 12:07 AM

If he was not replaced, then Robert would not rest until he find the missing baby. Replacing him ensures his survival


Which is why Robert spent so much time hunting Viserys and Dany ... oh he didn't?

#59 eivers

eivers

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:10 AM

To be fair it is stated that Robert's hatred is so intense he kills him every night in his dreams, I wouldn't put it past him to hunt down Rhaegar's first born to make sure his line is extinguished for ever.

#60 isisini

isisini

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:48 AM

My hunch is that Aegon is a fake. He really reminds me of Lambert Simnel, the real-life pretender to Henry VII. Simnel was a commoner boy who bore an uncanny resemblance to the 'Princes in the Tower' who were executed by the Richard III. He was adopted as a young child by a priest who styled himself as a 'kingmaker' and given the best possible upbringing, so that he was "a boy so learned, that, had he ruled, he would have as a learned man." The priest and a group of contemporaries then claimed he was the long lost Earl of Warwick and had a claim to the throne, even managing to raise a mercenary army thanks to his 'Aunt', the Duchess of Burgundy, who believed he was who he said he was or was willing to suspend disbelief. They tried to invade Yorkshire, couldn't win the support of the local nobles, and the rebellion was put down by the King. Because he was seen as a puppet, the King pardoned Lambert, who ended up working the rest of his days in the king's household. I can't help feeling Aegon's story will end in a similar way..