Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SuperTechmarine

Aegon is real v2

419 posts in this topic

First Thread.

I've noticed i'm one of the rare few that actually believe that Aegon is in fact the legitimate son of Rhaegar, prince of the Iron Throne. The forum choosing instead to follow the popular Blackfyre theory which i find to have glaring contradictions.



How did Varys know Aegon's corpse would be unrecognizable?


Simple, Wildfire.


Varys had spies everywhere, him knowing about Aerys's Wildfire plot wouldn't be that far fetched. And what does fire do to people? It burns them, Wildfire turns them to

ash. It wouldn't that far fetched for Varys to rely on the wildfire making the Pisswater prince's corpse unrecognizable.


The fact that Gregor Clegane was brutal enough to bash his head was simply a stroke of luck for Varys.

Elia could plausibly been on it.

If Elia was capable of getting the fake child to survive, it would mean her own son would get to live. Protecting the Pisswater Prince automatically meant protecting her own child. She knew (or thought) that, should the Pisswater Prince die, Aegon would never be able to live his live normally.



Again, Rhaenys was a girl, no harm to anyone, least of all Robert, who could have kept her as a hostage to (1) ensure the loyalty of all Targaryen loyalists, and (2) ensure the loyalty of Dorne. She would have remained a hostage, until Robert had a son of his own old enough to marry her, uniting the blood lines and ensuring the security of the future reign.

If Elia believed this was what would happen to Rhaenys, than it would explain why Aegon's safety seemed (!) more important to her at the moment.

Finding substitutes for a baby is easy, not so much for a full-grown adult and a young toddler. And Varys didn't want Aerys to notice that they were gone, a man as

paranoid as he was would have left guards watching them at all times.

Thus it would have been impractical for Varys and Co to rescue them too.


As for the silly argument that Elia not running to protect Rhaenys disproves Aegon's reality, let me remind you that they were in completely different rooms and that Gregor

Clegane was in the holdfast by the time the sack began.


And that maternal instinct applies to every infant, no matter whether it's another woman's or not (would you leave a baby out to die simply because it isn't yours?)


Politically, Rhaenys and Elia weren't of much value. Leaving her Elia to die inflammated Dorne against the Lannisters pretty hard. Also see above quote.


Varys and Illyrio's original plan.

Whilst giving the Dragon eggs to Dany, Illyrio wasn't expecting them to hatch.

Their full plan was to marry Dany to Khal Drogo, getting Viserys an army to invade Westeros with, no matter at which time.


Said invasion would be brutal, towns sacked, women raped, men killed, children enslaved earning Dany and Viserys's the hatred of Westeros.


Enter Aegon and the Golden Company (hired by Illyrio), they defeat the Dothraki, kill Viserys's and Dany. Earning the gratitude of the nobles and commoners alike.


They crown him King and Varys and Illyrio get to rule Westeros through a puppet.



Varys doesn't seem like a Targ loyalist to me.


Believe it or not he is, people say he nurtured Aerys's paranoia regarding Rhaegar. People ignore the fact that Rhaegar really was planning to overthrow his father.


He also urged Aerys to not open the gates of KL.


Why would the GC fight for Aegon?



"Black or Red, a dragon is still a dragon."



Not to mention the fact that the male line of the Blackfyres has been dead for over 40 years.

Lummel, on 20 Dec 2013 - 3:09 PM, said:

I am surprised that people believe this Pisswater Bend story which, if you pardon my French, seems to be taking the Pisswater Bend itself.



It is a tale told to us directly by Aegon, who can't have remembered it himself and was presumably either told to him by Illyrio or indirectly by Jon Connington none of whom were witnesses to the events. Perhaps the tales goes back to Varys, who of course has no vested interest in the story whatsoever and can be considered to be completely honest, objective and trustworthy in this situation!



It requires us to believe that:
Varys either persuaded Elia that the situation was dangerous enough to agree to the babyswap yet not so dangerous that she and Rhaenys needed to be rescued, or that Varys was lurking in wait in one of the secret passages and executed the swap as soon as he knew the sack was taking place and before the swap could be notice - (yet decided to abandon Elia and Rhaenys who under the Targaryen system would presumably have been intended to be little Aegon's bride)
That a ship was waiting all casual like at the docks for Varys to use - a ship that nobody apparently noticed and that later disappeared without a trace or a hint of the escape getting out even though in ADWD we learn that Illyrio can only get a couple of years of silence from the crew that smuggled out Tyrion by sending the ship to the other side of the world. Why would there need to be a ship on hand? Varys easily could have hidden Aegon in the Red Keep in the secret passages, or somewhere in the city, until a ship had arrived. And the people on the ship who could tell the tales? Well, nobody lives forever, and sometimes, you can speed that moment up a bit for them.
That staff were on hand, at least one wetnurse, guards?, Servants? a steward? All of whom are conveniently silent too since there's never been a rumour of Aegon living knocking about in the story. At the Wall, there was a baby but no wetnurse, and the child was fed with goat milk until a wetnurse was found. If it can be done at the Wall, it can most certainly be done at KL.
That Varys does this because, well why? He is certainly not a loyalist otherwise he would have saved Elia and Rhaenys too, nor would Daenerys and Viserys have been abandoned only to be integrated into the plan with the intention that Viserys dies and Daenerys is ruled out of contention through marriage to a barbarian. Perhaps he does it because he likes to troll people for decades on end? Elia's death would have inflammed the Dornish more than her being alive would have done. There was no reason for Rhaenys to get killed. Also, Dany and Viserys were followed around by hired knives all their lives, but never caught. Why? Because Viserys was so very good in fighting? In plotting? No, because of something else. There is no evidence for it, but it's not entirely impossible that Varys and/or Illyrio were involved.

"It was Ser Amory who brought me the girl’s body, if you must know. He found her hiding under her father’s bed, as if she believed Rhaegar could still protect her. Princess Elia and the babe were in the nursery a floor below"



This is all that is known about the position of the nursery, and it's relative distance to Rhaegar's rooms.




I have to thus conclude, that Aegon can be Real, despite what forum says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you explain Dany's visions, again? I can't remember...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you explain Dany's visions, again? I can't remember...

I didn't because i never explained them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read all the first thread, but what are your thoughts/explanation on the ammount of Blackfyre foreshadowing? (ie Dunk and Egg, dragon sign on the quiet isle etc).


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the problem, all your arguments are doing is defending the barest theoretical possibility of Aegon being real against just some of the arguments raised by those who believe he's fake.



So while you can argue that it's not absolutely inconceivable that Elia would go to a fake baby instead of her own daughter or that Varys was counting on wildfire making he child unrecognizable, that will never constitute evidence that he is, in fact, real. It's just reactive conjecture, and all it does is preserve the slimmest possibility that he is real if we apply a very strong standard of doubt. It offers no positive evidence that he's real.



When your 'proof' comes down to defending against sundry pieces of evidence and argument by offering possibilities that have no evidence to support them, it's time to give up this extreme standard of doubt and accept that bare possibility simply doesn't stand against the reams of positive evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see the facts.



If he is fake:



Some of the evidences:




Quaithe's prophecy.


and griffin, the sun's son and the mummer's dragon.


The Golden Company=Blackfyre


Some contracts are writ in ink, and some in blood. I say no more


Beneath the gold, the bitter steel



Illyrio


When Maelys the Monstrous died upon the Stepstones, it was the end of the male line of House Blackfyre.


Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon






House of the Undying


A cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd.



If he is real:


Nothing more than JonCon's words who saw him when he was 5 or 6. Varys never says that Aegon is Rhaegar's son.







Here's the problem, all your arguments are doing is defending the barest theoretical possibility of Aegon being real against just some of the arguments raised by those who believe he's fake.



So while you can argue that it's not absolutely inconceivable that Elia would go to a fake baby instead of her own daughter or that Varys was counting on wildfire making he child unrecognizable, that will never constitute evidence that he is, in fact, real. It's just reactive conjecture, and all it does is preserve the slimmest possibility that he is real if we apply a very strong standard of doubt. It offers no positive evidence that he's real.



When your 'proof' comes down to defending against sundry pieces of evidence and argument by offering possibilities that have no evidence to support them, it's time to give up this extreme standard of doubt and accept that bare possibility simply doesn't stand against the reams of positive evidence.





:agree:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see the facts.

If he is fake:

Some of the evidences:

Quaithe's prophecy.

I've said this a thousand times and i'll say it again:

Varys = Mummer

Aegon = Dragon

Mummer's Dragon = Aegon is Varys's puppet.

The Golden Company=Blackfyre

Targaryens and Blackfyres have the same blood in case you forgot.

House of the Undying

There was a cloth dragon in KL in AFfC IIRC, 'twas a play that the crowd loved.

If he is real:

Nothing more than JonCon's words who saw him when he was 5 or 6. Varys never says that Aegon is Rhaegar's son.

Read the the post above you that you ignored.

And if you won't, i'll taunt you again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the problem, all your arguments are doing is defending the barest theoretical possibility of Aegon being real against just some of the arguments raised by those who believe he's fake.

So while you can argue that it's not absolutely inconceivable that Elia would go to a fake baby instead of her own daughter or that Varys was counting on wildfire making he child unrecognizable, that will never constitute evidence that he is, in fact, real. It's just reactive conjecture, and all it does is preserve the slimmest possibility that he is real if we apply a very strong standard of doubt. It offers no positive evidence that he's real.

When your 'proof' comes down to defending against sundry pieces of evidence and argument by offering possibilities that have no evidence to support them, it's time to give up this extreme standard of doubt and accept that bare possibility simply doesn't stand against the reams of positive evidence.

Your precious Blackfyre theory is also conjecture. In case you forgot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your precious Blackfyre theory is also conjecture. In case you forgot.

Yeah everything at this point is basically conjecture, I just find it hard to believe that we'd be given all this information about Blackfyres if it didn't serve some fairly major purpose in the plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope Drogon burns him to a crisp

Honestly, i hope both Aegon and Dany die in the DD 2.0, that'd be awesome.

Yeah everything at this point is basically conjecture, I just find it hard to believe that we'd be given all this information about Blackfyres if it didn't serve some fairly major purpose in the plot.

Until Arianne/Daenerys verifies Aegon's legitimacy, i refuse to believe he's fake/Blackfyre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your precious Blackfyre theory is also conjecture. In case you forgot.

Yeah everything at this point is basically conjecture, I just find it hard to believe that we'd be given all this information about Blackfyres if it didn't serve some fairly major purpose in the plot.

I don't think you understand what conjecture is. It's not conjecture if it has evidence backing it. That's my point, there's lots of evidence backing the Blackfyre theory, so it rises well beyond the point of being conjecture, while arguments that Aegon are real are all conjecture in response to the many points in favor of the Blackfyre theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you explain Dany's visions, again? I can't remember...

A "mummer's dragon" can be interpreted as a dragon that belongs to a mummer. Varys was a mummer and has supported Aegon for years.

My sticking point is Moqorro when he says dragons young and old, true and false. Who are these dragons? Is Jon both the young and true dragon? Is Aegon the false one? Is BR the old dragon? Does he really know that one of the dragons is false, or does he simply think that because in the flames he sees Dany declaring him a false dragon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Until Arianne/Daenerys verifies Aegon's legitimacy, i refuse to believe he's fake/Blackfyre.

So if Arienne or Daenerys says that Aegon is legitimate you will start to believe that he is fake?

...I have to thus conclude, that Aegon can be Real, despite what forum says.

Yes of course you can believe that Aegon is real, and you won't be the only one on the forum who does. However the Aegon survives scenario is still taking the Pisswater Bend and to explain away the objections who have to imagine an increasingly contrived set of situations. The objection to the Pisswater Bend story doesn't hang on one unlikely circumstance but an entire chain of unlikely and events none of which have independent verification. What you need is a story that is more plausible in the first place than the Pisswater Bend story, that's the problem, the story as a whole doesn't give an adequate explanation of what Varys and Illyrio are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Varys doesn't seem like a Targ loyalist to me.

Believe it or not he is, people say he nurtured Aerys's paranoia regarding Rhaegar. People ignore the fact that Rhaegar really was planning to overthrow his father.

He also urged Aerys to not open the gates of KL.

Varys undermined Aerys, feeding his madness, and worked against Rhaegar's taking over for him. It's no stretch that he alienated Aerys against his very competent Hand, Tywin, allowing a series of screwups to hold that position. Keeping Aerys on the throne is a good parallel to maintaining Cersei in power to have someone incompetent in charge. A very good case can be made for Varys working for the downfall of the Tagraryen main line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in one version or the other, Real Aegon, Fake Aegon, or Aegon Blackfyre come to take the throne. Alot of the last thread had lots of interesting ideas about the possiblities either way, from the hows and whys of it, to did or didn't Elia know and how that figured into it, and I'm not married to it turning out in a specific way. In many ways, I don't think it matters should Aegon get enough people to follow him, whether they believe or not, and he has a good start on numbers already. He has a good start on preparation, and he has a chance to make alliances with other big factions on the board (of Westeros, not Westeros.org).



I do think there is a chance the 'mummer's dragon' could simply be that we have a mummer in Varys and the Aegon is the dragon that he not only presents, but the dragon that, at this present time, Varys seems to be in league with and actually controlling.



I think there is a possiblty that Dany's 'cloth dragon' could just have been her own vision of the 'mummer's dragon.' There is also the possibility that Dany's 'cloth dragon' and her description to Jorah about them being used in mummers' shows in the Free Cities means that Dany will encounter a dragon who was raised and hidden in the Free Cities, in Essos, the home of the cloth dragons.



For argument's sake, I suppose, the cloth dragon could also mean that this dragon, Aegon, really was born and bred in Essos, comes from Essos, and is not Rhaegar's son. Or, it could mean that hell, we have one more dragon to still pop out of the woodwork, or........as pointed out before, it could have referred to the other mummers dragon and puppeeters in Kings Landing (not sure I get that as more than a real long shot).



I just think the 'cloth dragon' is another way to say Mummers Dragon or could be a way to suggest the involvement of those in Essos, The Free Cities, ie........Aegon, the Golden Company, Illyrio, all associates of the dragon that is supposed to be this Aegon and they all have come from across the sea, the place where Dany said she learned of 'cloth' dragons.



I'm not married to any theory, I'm not sure that it's one way or the other, but I don't understand what seems to be a problem to have a simple discussion about it, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you understand what conjecture is. It's not conjecture if it has evidence backing it. That's my point, there's lots of evidence backing the Blackfyre theory, so it rises well beyond the point of being conjecture, while arguments that Aegon are real are all conjecture in response to the many points in favor of the Blackfyre theory.

My theory has evidence backing in case you hadn't noticed.

Varys undermined Aerys, feeding his madness, and worked against Rhaegar's taking over for him. It's no stretch that he alienated Aerys against his very competent Hand, Tywin, allowing a series of screwups to hold that position. Keeping Aerys on the throne is a good parallel to maintaining Cersei in power to have someone incompetent in charge. A very good case can be made for Varys working for the downfall of the Tagraryen main line.

What? He undermined Tywin and Aerys's relationship? When did that happen?

Also to quote the White Bull:

"You swore a vow to protect the King, not to judge him."

Varys was doing his job pure and simple it's probable he didn't have his plan to save (Real) Aegon from the start.

I don't believe in one version or the other, Real Aegon, Fake Aegon, or Aegon Blackfyre come to take the throne. Alot of the last thread had lots of interesting ideas about the possiblities either way, from the hows and whys of it, to did or didn't Elia know and how that figured into it, and I'm not married to it turning out in a specific way. In many ways, I don't think it matters should Aegon get enough people to follow him, whether they believe or not, and he has a good start on numbers already. He has a good start on preparation, and he has a chance to make alliances with other big factions on the board (of Westeros, not Westeros.org).

I do think there is a chance the 'mummer's dragon' could simply be that we have a mummer in Varys and the Aegon is the dragon that he not only presents, but the dragon that, at this present time, Varys seems to be in league with and actually controlling.

I think there is a possiblty that Dany's 'cloth dragon' could just have been her own vision of the 'mummer's dragon.' There is also the possibility that Dany's 'cloth dragon' and her description to Jorah about them being used in mummers' shows in the Free Cities means that Dany will encounter a dragon who was raised and hidden in the Free Cities, in Essos, the home of the cloth dragons.

For argument's sake, I suppose, the cloth dragon could also mean that this dragon, Aegon, really was born and bred in Essos, comes from Essos, and is not Rhaegar's son. Or, it could mean that hell, we have one more dragon to still pop out of the woodwork, or........as pointed out before, it could have referred to the other mummers dragon and puppeeters in Kings Landing (not sure I get that as more than a real long shot).

I just think the 'cloth dragon' is another way to say Mummers Dragon or could be a way to suggest the involvement of those in Essos, The Free Cities, ie........Aegon, the Golden Company, Illyrio, all associates of the dragon that is supposed to be this Aegon and they all have come from across the sea, the place where Dany said she learned of 'cloth' dragons.

I'm not married to any theory, I'm not sure that it's one way or the other, but I don't understand what seems to be a problem to have a simple discussion about it, either.

There's still two books to come, maybe a new pretender will pop out?

So if Arienne or Daenerys says that Aegon is legitimate you will start to believe that he is fake?

If Arienne and/or Dany outright confirm that ®Aegon is real then i'm right. I'm not necessarily a contrarian for going against the forum's views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if Arienne or Daenerys says that Aegon is legitimate you will start to believe that he is fake?

Yup, like they know all about it. Dany has yet to even learn of Aegon's existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is no way that Varys can b that good of predicting, the degree of brutality that the Mountain would do to the "pisswater prince". How come Elia fought like crazy for a fake? plus people would have noticed such a servants close to Elia if the baby suddenly changed.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "mummer's dragon" can be interpreted as a dragon that belongs to a mummer. Varys was a mummer and has supported Aegon for years.

My sticking point is Moqorro when he says dragons young and old, true and false. Who are these dragons? Is Jon both the young and true dragon? Is Aegon the false one? Is BR the old dragon? Does he really know that one of the dragons is false, or does he simply think that because in the flames he sees Dany declaring him a false dragon?

That is the one thing, that word false. Moqorro's words seem really easy to follow and inspite of the fact I don't trust him, even as far as his intentions with Dany (I don't think he'd care about her own feelings and beliefs on fulfilling the prophecy), his words do seem easy to follow, for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.