Aegon as Faegon problem, Jon Snow, and House of Undying vision

[Ygrain]

3 hours ago, a1andrew said:

Looks like all the info is secondhand hearsay, and that the main source says he might have remembered it wrong,

No. The part about possibly misremembering is about the child in the vision being dead, not on the identity of the mother and child. - Which, BTW, fits with the timeframe of the books: Rhaegar was on DS when Aegon was born, and was dead by the time Jon was born at ToJ. 

[Makk]

13 hours ago, a1andrew said:

Looks like all the info is secondhand hearsay, and that the main source says he might have remembered it wrong, which is a recurring problem with hearsay and why it generally isn't allowed in a court of law

I won't deny that it is meaningful evidence, but that's far from reliable evidence.   At the end of the day, I'm going to assume Martin was not being sloppy and bizarre by choosing to use the one use of the title of the book series in a misdirection, and that the Aegon in the scene is alive and one of the ptwp, either as Jon Snow or Elia's Aegon.  It could well be that the Aegon from the vision is dead, but if so I'd be disappointed and would find it to be a rare act of poor storytelling on his part.

I'm pretty sure you are going to be disappointed 

Each to their own I guess. I personally think it is a very good piece of story telling. It simultaneously tells us about Rhaegar's character, it shows us how important prophecy is to him, it shows us how unreliable prophecy is, and gives a hint to Jon Snow's parentage. All done in a mysterious manner that makes perfect sense once you understand it.

However I can personally understand not taking quotes outside the actual source material as evidence. Until it's published it may be a mistake, something that gets changed, a misquote or even a lie.

[J. Stargaryen]

On 8/11/2017 at 7:31 AM, Amris said:

I don't know if Aegon is real or not (I think a Blackfyre Aegon would offer more story potential and has some possible hints for it but it still is just conjecture with no solid evidence. Aegon may still be real. Be that as it may: I can definitely answer your above question of 'would Martin choose to use the ONE reference  ...':

The answer is a clear and resounding 'Yes!'

And not by mistake at all.

That's what Martin does all the time! It is one of is trademark methods during writing: give a clue which seemingly pertains to a certain person - when it really pertains to another person. (Like Arya looks like Lyanna. Jon looks like Arya. So really the clue was: Jon looks like Lyanna.) It's the same method at work here.

I think you're definitely on the right path here. Myself, I think Rhaegar was talking about Aegon, but GRRM was telling us was Jon's real name is—Aegon. The OP's post is just another in a long line of examples of people who believe the baby and mother are Jon and Lyanna. And it's for the reasons that the OP mentions. Chiefly the SoIaF reference, but also the PtwP. Two things that are much more likely in reference to Jon than Elia's son. So, GRRM has Rhaegar tell us that the PtwP has a song, the SoIaF. Rhaegar also gives a name to the PtwP+SoIaF character—Aegon.

A long-winded way of saying that I think Lyanna named her son Aegon. Rhaegar didn't choose this name for Lyanna's child, she did. And she did it after Rhaegar and his family in KL had all been murdered. If the Lyanna and the KG didn't already know this before the showdown with Ned, she would have learned it from him after. It's exactly why she extracted the promise from Ned to protect Jon, and why it was only after Ned had agreed that the fear went out of her eyes.