Aegon's claim

[Disputatious]

Varys killed Ser Kevan but before the man dies, he apologizes for doing so, but claims a larger purpose (they all do that, don't they?) Is anyone questioning his explanation of why he is doing this? (I mean the pragmatic point that it is a matter of necessity to prevent Ser Kevan from consolidating Tommen's rule and the coalition behind him).

[Mithras]

So far as Doran goes:

why bother sending Arianne off to investigate if he already has the full story from Varys?

Doran planned to send Arianne as a cupbearer to the Archon of Tyrosh. But his real intention was to have ARianne meet secrelty with her fiancee. What makes you think that he is not doing the same thing here? I think both Team fAegon and Doran agreed on the terms long time ago. They know their children well and putting them together will only result in a romance.

I don't buy this line, the most important thing in the world is who he says he is. Would Varys and Illyrio just take the secret to their graves laughing because they managed to fool everyone? There's no "symbolic victory" in Aegon being a Blackfyre, there's only victory in him actually being one (and everyone knowing it).

The same goes for the previous and current occupants of Stannis' throne, Joffrey and Tommen: we know them to be Lannisters, but Cersei or anyone else can never admit it, nor tell their children their true parentage, and there's no symbolic victory in them actually being Lannisters as long as they carry the Baratheon name.

And if there was no war or anything, in a few generations their childrens would still be Baratheons and the dirty secret would be forgotten.

The victors write the history. In time, they might produce new history books to whitewash Daemon and they can reveal the true parentage of fAegon after a long time.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

From a person known to never tell lies, but only "half truths", it is pretty solid evidence, especially consdering he told this to Kevan right before killing him. Who else would he have been saying that for, why tell a lie to a dead man? You can argue that one of his "little birds" was hanging around, but that is, quite literally, making shit up out of thin air just to support a bad theory.

Even Ned fucking Stark could lie, if it was important enough. Why would Varys? Because that's the story he'd be telling since that day until he died. For the same reason, why Littlefinger insisted on Sansa being "Alayne" even when they were apparently alone.

He looks like a Targ, he doesn't simply have "some Valyrian features" (which aren't as common as fAegon theorists like to let on. We are not left with any reason to believe these are particularly common traits).

Now that's a fine example of "making shit up out of thin air just to support a bad theory". "Looking like a Targ" and "having Valyrian features" are synonyms. The Bastard of Driftmark, with no significant relation to the Targs (at least no closer than a Blackfyre would have), is a dead ringer for the late Rhaegar Targaryen.

This is no Human Right's court, but the "innocent until proven guilty" model is used because of the simple logic behind the burden of proof being on the person crying foul,

Guess what: that person is Varys. According to universally accepted history Amory Lorch and Gregor Clegane murdered Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon. Varys is the one who cries "everything you know is a sham, take my word for it".

[Lost Melnibonean]

You also must remember that using the clues given, Tyrion one of the smartest charcters figured out who Young Griff truly was

He sure did...

He may well be a Targaryen after all.

[Lost Melnibonean]

Varys must have provided them with some proof that Aegon really is who he is. Both Aegon and Jon would be incredible naive and stupid to even consider people will believe their word only. And even if Jon is blind about Aegon being fake out of guilt, Varys wouldn't expect Doran to be the same. Mostly of Varys' plans so far depend on good luck and wish for the best, apparently.

Deep down Jon doesn't really believe it either...

"Your father's lands are beautiful," he said. His silvery hair was blowing in the wind, and his eyes were a deep purple, darker than this boy's.

But he wants it to be true oh so much.

[Lost Melnibonean]

Actually what is the point in talking to dying man at all? Think on that for while.

For the author to communicate to the reader?

[Lord Damian]

The phrase you're looking for is ''for all intents and purposes''.

Perception is not reality.

Occam's razor dictates that we would assume he is fake, given the near ubiquitously accepted premise - confirmed by multiple POV's (that Aegon is dead), and given that any evidence to the contrary is somewhat spurious through it's association with Varys, a suspected blackfyre and proven liar.

Thankyou, my grammar is terrible, I know

[Jon's Queen Consort]

The theory that FAegon is Rhaegar's son is based at Varys' words, who never said Aegon Targaryen Rhaegar's son.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

What evidence is there that he is real? We only have the word of Varys and Illyrio, two proven liars. If you go buy appearance, many people in the Free Cities have Valyrian ancestry with plenty of people in Lys sharing similar coloring to Aegon, like Serra, Illyrio's late wife who shares similar descriptions to Aegon such as big blue eyes.

Besides, it is hinted at by clues in the text and GRRM himself that Dany will fight Aegon. She would have to have a legitimate reason to fight a boy who is supposedly her brother's son.

To be fair, Dany fighting Aegon won't have to mean Aegon is fake. It will most likely mean that Dany believes Aegon to be fake. Aegon, in that scenario, could still be real. People just don't believe it.

You are referring to the second, yet to come, Dance of the Dragons (2.0)?

Because in that case, I'd like to point out that, with all the parallels I've seen people make on the forums between Aegon (green) and Dany (black), whilst always voting that Aegon is fake, that the original Dance was fought between two legitimate Targaryens, not between one legitimate Targaryen and a fake one.

[Mithras]

To be fair, Dany fighting Aegon won't have to mean Aegon is fake. It will most likely mean that Dany believes Aegon to be fake. Aegon, in that scenario, could still be real. People just don't believe it.

You are referring to the second, yet to come, Dance of the Dragons (2.0)?

Because in that case, I'd like to point out that, with all the parallels I've seen people make on the forums between Aegon (green) and Dany (black), whilst always voting that Aegon is fake, that the original Dance was fought between two legitimate Targaryens, not between one legitimate Targaryen and a fake one.

The Dance 2.0. will also be the final Blackfyre campaign. GRRM would not create all that Blackfyre history with such detail if it would not effect the main story.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

Aegon is a blackfyre either the bastard son of Aerys conceived after the burning of Rickard Stark or the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna .

[In A Coat of Gold]

If Targ features were so common, why hide Aegon on a poleboat most of his life? He could have been in Pentos with Illyrio living the good life.

[Kernest]

If Targ features were so common, why hide Aegon on a poleboat most of his life? He could have been in Pentos with Illyrio living the good life.

Well even though Varys is the master of whispers, there's a chance the word might get out that a man strongly resembling the supposedly dead best friend of Rhaegar Targaryen is at the house of more or less known Targ supporter with a boy that has Valyrian features and just happens to be the same age as Rhaegar's son would be...

Though I think they might have been a tiny bit overzealous in hiding his secret.

On another topic: If we consider the Occam's razor argument already presented earlier, why would that mean that Aegon is a Blackfyre? By the very definition of the simplest explanation, we should assume that Aegon is just a random kid with Valyrian features with no relation whatsoever to either Targaryens or Blackfyres.

[Buried Treasure]

If Targ features were so common, why hide Aegon on a poleboat most of his life? He could have been in Pentos with Illyrio living the good life.

Does it even say how long they were on the poleboat? Illyrio knows the kid well enough that it seems possible they did live with him for a time. Maybe they left Pentos to escape the Grey Plague, or because Illyrio had to run his scheme with Viserys?

And whilst Valyrian features are common (half the whores in Lys have them apparently), exiled Westerosi lords with red hair are not. Varys put the two together early so that Jon C could support the Aegon story but a known Targaryen loyalist with a Valyrian featured boy is suspicious. They both dyed their hair, to improve their father-son story by masking the dissimilarty of their features.

I also don't discount that Varys is crafting a narrative for Aegon (true, regardless of whether he is the genuine article). Westeros has fairy tales just as we do and people like to fit others into narrative boxes (see also 'Princess' Val). Aegon the prince hidden on a poleboat is a better sell than Aegon, raised in a cheese merchant's mansion.

[Lord Damian]

I understand the grooming of a humble, well studdied king and all they have tried to do but I honestly doubt they had the forethought to switch babies if Ellia would have allowed it to begin with. Varys is a master of turning every moment into an opportunity. Illyrio dangerously gets to verbally loose with his words when speaking with Tyrion. Tyrion is smarter then him and that may come back to haunt him. A dragon is still a dragon, yes and a bastard is still a bastard unless legitimized and then they have to get in the back of the family pecking order BEHIND THE LEGITIMATE CHILDREN REGARDLESS OF THEIR AGE. That is something the Blackfyres and their supporters have never understood, to their own demise.

Aegon is fake. No doubt in my mind.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Deep down Jon doesn't really believe it either...

But he wants it to be true oh so much.

Dany, Rhaegar and Viserys have different tone of purple eyes. I don't think that means that much.

[WalkerDragon]

Actually what is the point in talking to dying man at all? Think on that for while.

That the whole point of the Lannister plotline. Ser Kevin is the last head of the Lannister house disregarding Cersei in her situation. The Lannisters are falling apart. Vary's want to rub it in Ser Kevin and the Lannister's faces telling them that they lost and all they did was for nothing. Given the situation, it is safe to assume Vary's wasn't saying half-truths. He say's Aegon and Kevin assumes he is Rhaegar's son. Vary's didn't correct him why? Because he guessed right. Unless you want to bring in the thought that Young Griff is a Blackfyre named Aegon, which is total BS.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

The Dance 2.0. will also be the final Blackfyre campaign. GRRM would not create all that Blackfyre history with such detail if it would not effect the main story.

Keeping in mind that GRRM loves writing about Targaryens, ans that not all Dunk and Egg stories are about the Blackfyre's, I'd call it partly passion, and partly world building.

Of course it will also have an effect on the current story, but I wouldn't dismiss the fact that people will be suspicious because of the Blackfyre history. That doesn't mean Aegon is a Blackfyre. Our decisions today are based on our history, right? The same would be in asoiaf-universe. That the suspicion is needed (and thus automatically the background story for the sources of those suspicions), doesn't automatically mean that there has to be a male Blackfyre around in present time. It could be. But it doesn't have to be.

[Lost Melnibonean]

Dany, Rhaegar and Viserys have different tone of purple eyes. I don't think that means that much.

In isolation, you're right it means nothing. But why did the author insert that comparison by Jon? It came right after a passage that suggested Jon had been romantically attracted to Rhaegar and after we saw how motivated Jon was to restore is own honor. We had already learned the color of Aegon's eyes in a Tyrion chapter.

[Fred of Ashai]

Thats not true at all. If you are declared legally dead, as Aegon was, it is your job to prove you are you, not the courts job to prove you are not, and it is not easy to prove. Secondly, there is no evidence pointing to him being real, so saying there is as much evidence of him being real as there is fake is not true. By evidence I mean foreshadowing in the books etc, not Jon con saying Ilyrio told me this was Aegon, and Varys telling kevin Aegon is here. Those are claims, not evidence.

He wasn't declared legally dead. The only evidence for him being dead is the word of Tywin Lannister and Gregor Clegane, plus a mutilated corpse. Basically, there is as much evidence for Aegon being dead as there is for Bran being dead.