[ADwD Spoilers]The Mummers dragon

[A Wolf of Winterfell]

They aren't used to represent generic enemies, they are used to represent dragons. Dragons are iconic, recognizable and associated (in the Free Cities, where Dany grew up) with the Valyrian empire. That makes them great enemies to fight for a fictional hero in a play.

In Westeros the reaction might be quite different, depending on the audience. A mummer's dragon being immediately associated with house Targaryen kicks off the events of the first Dunk and Egg short story, for example.

I don't think a mummer's dragon automatically means the dragon enemy implies House Targaryen in every instance a mummer's play decides to use one. Why can't a mummer use the dragon to represent a generic dragon? Where is it said that the mummer's dragon is a reference to House Targaryen in this series other than the one readers assume? Dany implies they are used to give the hero a cause to fight. Seems pretty generic to me, a beast for the hero to slay. Whether the dragon in the prophesy represents a Targaryen or not, a mummer's dragon is definitely symbolic of the enemy. I've never read a Dunk and Egg story, so I don't have any means to reference the context in which you claim the Targaryens are associated with the mummer's dragon.

Sure, false enemy could work. If Dany wasn't a Targaryen and thus very much associated with dragons. Cast in a mummer's play, Dany's character wouldn't fight the cloth dragon, she'd be riding it.

And the dragon is shown in a cheering crowd. That has to play into the interpretation as well. Seems to me that the lie to be slain is the crowd's view of the dragon. Dany will show it to be a fake.

Dany can still be a dragon for the false enemy theory to work. Why couldn't a dragon slay another dragon? Dany can still be the hero against a dragon enemy. In my opinion you're trying to make the prophesy too literal, in order to argue your point. Prophesies aren't obvious, which is why we are debating the finer points when we could both end up wrong in the end. I think you do have a valid point that the lie could potentially be the crowd's opinion of the Dragon, that's certainly another option. If the crowd is cheering for the dragon, it could mean the people are cheering for a false hero, one Dany will expose as an enemy.

Of course there's room for different interpretations. I just think that all alternative interpretations brought up so far require a lot more twisting of words and over-emphasize what characters say about the vision, not what the vision itself shows. Characters in the story so far have proven to be very bad at interpreting prophecy and they generally have less information than the reader.

This particular part of the prophecy is very vague. I do think Dany calling the dragon on a pole a mummer's dragon and Jorah asking her what that means is important dialogue, and has significant bearing on the interpretation of the Undying's words. You may think I'm over twisting the facts, that's fine, but I don't think I'm twisting anything any more than you or anyone else. The fact that Dany tells Jorah that the dragon she see is a mummer's dragon and that it represents an enemy for the hero to fight, opens the door for a different interpretation of the slayer of lies portion of the prophesy. This doesn't involve any more twisting of words than assuming the cloth dragon lie is the identity of the dragon. It's merely speculation to conclude the dragon on the cloth refers to a Targaryen pretender. I wouldn't mind at all if Aegon turned out to be fake, I just don't think the fake Aegon interpretation is such a sure thing, so I'm offering up something else.

[Cydal]

Glowing like sunset, a red sword was raised in the hand of a blue-eyed king who cast no shadow. A cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd. From a smoking tower, a great stone beast took wing, breathing shadow fire.... mother of dragons, slayer of lies...

A great beast took wing breathing shadow fire could be the Stannis' shadow Mel sent to throw penrose off of the tower in storm's end.

[Marakesh]

If YG is really Aegon then he was extraordinarily lucky that the false Aegon baby was smashed beyond recognition by the Mountain. Frankly if that's how GRRM writes it I would find that a really hokey way to mislead the reader into thinking other Targs are all gone and then going back and, surprise, they are still around! However, GRRM tends to write in a more realistic way (with a couple exceptions). So, from the style of the book I conclude its more likely that Varys saw the baby Aegon's smashed in face and thought that this was an opportunity. Also, there is the case of Lambert Simnel during the War of the Roses which we know is a major influence on GRRM. Finally, I have to ask what does a real lost Targ add to the book? We have a strong suspicion we already have one incoming, with a lot of foreshadowing no less, so what more do we get from this? A fake Targ though is a whole new story line unto itself.

[Jon AS]

I don't think a mummer's dragon automatically means the dragon enemy implies House Targaryen in every instance a mummer's play decides to use one.

Of course not. But this isn't any kind of mummer's play. It's not even a real play. It's a vision of a fake dragon given to the last member of house Targaryen.

Dany can still be a dragon for the false enemy theory to work. Why couldn't a dragon slay another dragon? Dany can still be the hero against a dragon enemy. In my opinion you're trying to make the prophesy too literal, in order to argue your point. Prophesies aren't obvious, which is why we are debating the finer points when we could both end up wrong in the end. I think you do have a valid point that the lie could potentially be the crowd's opinion of the Dragon, that's certainly another option. If the crowd is cheering for the dragon, it could mean the people are cheering for a false hero, one Dany will expose as an enemy.

Too literal? If one were to take it literally, it would be a prophecy about Dany attending a popular mummer's show.

This particular part of the prophecy is very vague. I do think Dany calling the dragon on a pole a mummer's dragon and Jorah asking her what that means is important dialogue, and has significant bearing on the interpretation of the Undying's words. You may think I'm over twisting the facts, that's fine, but I don't think I'm twisting anything any more than you or anyone else. The fact that Dany tells Jorah that the dragon she see is a mummer's dragon and that it represents an enemy for the hero to fight, opens the door for a different interpretation of the slayer of lies portion of the prophesy. This doesn't involve any more twisting of words than assuming the cloth dragon lie is the identity of the dragon. It's merely speculation to conclude the dragon on the cloth refers to a Targaryen pretender. I wouldn't mind at all if Aegon turned out to be fake, I just don't think the fake Aegon interpretation is such a sure thing, so I'm offering up something else.

The question remains, why use the imagery of a fake dragon at all, if it's just about a random enemy she'll have to fight? In fact, what kind of a lame prophecy is it to tell Dany "There'll be some enemies you must overcome in your future"? I mean, at this point she already has a list of rather impressive enemies, that would hardly constitute a revelation.

And the idea of "Aegon" being false doesn't just hinge on this prophecy, it's various plot points coming together.

[Alexius]

Finally, I have to ask what does a real lost Targ add to the book? We have a strong suspicion we already have one incoming, with a lot of foreshadowing no less, so what more do we get from this? A fake Targ though is a whole new story line unto itself.

Real Targ lawfully undermines Daenerys' claims and allows to show her inner conflict caused by her self-entitlement. What does a fake Targ add to the book, beside being just another pretender to deal with?

[Silverin]

I actually do believe Aegon is a fake one.

Varys said he is working for the good of the Realm. The Realm would not profited from a real Targ restoration, becuase the Targs have the mad DNA. No matter how wonderful one Targ is, because of they blood their heir could be just as crazy. It would be too much of a gamble to put one on the throne.

A fake one on the other hand would be much better. There wouldnt be a probeblem about the Targsanes, but on the other hand it seems like until there is a Targ on the Throne the Kingdom would be not united.

My fear about Aegon is however that he is set up as the one who has to take away the Throne from Tommen, and Myrcella, which could mean their death as well, and after everything Dany could just reappear slain the fake dragon, and get the Throne without ever having to deal with the murder of those children. I would really hate a storyline like that. Again she emerging as someone who is so morally above anyone else, I really dont want to see that. If she wants the bloody throne, she should be the one who dirties her hands.

As of now I am simpatising with Aegon, but I have the fear he will fail, I feel he could have become a decent ruler, listening to what Varys said. Despite the fact that the ones who set him up Varys, and Illiryo are the one's to blame the current state of the Kingdom pretty much.(Ned's execution, probably Tyrion slaying Tywin and Shae was influenced by Varys, and now the death of Kevan)

I think both he and Jon genuenly believes he is the real one. He is as sure as Dany that he is the one who has the right and duty for the Throne.

[borwin]

Lets not forget that the dragon MUST have three heads. So if Aegon isnt the real deal then who is the third head of the dragon?

[Ser Pistus]

Lets not forget that the dragon MUST have three heads. So if Aegon isnt the real deal then who is the third head of the dragon?

If Aegon isn't the real deal then who is the second? :)

[Errant Bard]

Lets not forget that the dragon MUST have three heads. So if Aegon isnt the real deal then who is the third head of the dragon?

Must? Why that?

You seem to work on the assumption that a dragon rider must be Targaryen.

I would rather look at the bride of fire prophecy.

[Ser Pistus]

I would rather look at the bride of fire prophecy.

Is there a part of that prophecy that might mean who the three heads are?

And also, do the "three heads of the dragon" mean the 3 riders of Dany's 3 dragons?

[Errant Bard]

Is there a part of that prophecy that might mean who the three heads are?

The three heads are part of no prophecy, explicitly.

But on the other hand, you would expect prophesied husbands to figure in the "three heads" triumvirate.

Anyway, I really question the "need" for "three heads". Sure, some people have said "the dragon has three heads", but I don't see what makes it a law instead of the repeating of a traditional saying. So far I would say that the dragon has one head, that this head is Dany, and that it will stay like that until the end of the books (where in the peaceful epilogue we might see the potential candidates stepping up their game and actually becoming a head). You don't think (for example) that Jon is ever going to ride a dragon/join Dany before the end of last book, if he ever does, do you?

And also, do the "three heads of the dragon" mean the 3 riders of Dany's 3 dragons?

Maybe, maybe not, I tend to believe the three heads are those on the targaryen sigil: the family figureheads, and actual dragons and riders are a separate matter, even though there is obviously a huge potential overlap, in that family heads will likely get preference in the dragon-riding department.

[Sega AM2]

Lets not forget that the dragon MUST have three heads. So if Aegon isnt the real deal then who is the third head of the dragon?

Dany, Tyrion, Azor Ahai (Jon). Those are your Dragon riders. You'd have to be insane to think otherwise at this point. Dany is obviously riding Drogon into Westeros. She's a sealed deal.

Tyrion designs Dragon saddles, fantasizes about riding Dragons, and is likely a secret Targ or at least it's lost that he's a Targ to everyone. Aerys, it is implied banged Tyrion's mom, and Tyrion has weird features like different color eyes, and whitish blond hair. And Tyrion survives every obstacle in his way proving that he has plot armor. And he's immune to greyscale. How ridiculous will the next two books be with Tyrion, a midget, riding around on a giant Dragon flaming down on The Others while saving the realm? Try not to laugh.

And Jon is obviously Azor Ahai. The 'bastard' son who rose to greatness against all odds even surviving death to be reborn. Oh and he's another secret Targ (R+L=J) don't forget. Ice and Fire. Snow (Stark) and Targ. Jon is another hero on the New Age of Heroes.

I hope that it is someone like Victarion, or Marwyn, or a Khal, or simply Dany herself leading three Dragons into battle. I'd rather see a wildcard than the obvious. But it seems painfully obvious that the miracle boys, Jon and Tyrion, are secret Targs and will unite with Dany to ride Dragons and destroy The Others. And save the day, and get the girl, and so on.

[Lord Varys]

If dead infant was not Aegon, he still had 'fair hair' - he possibly looked enough like Aegon to fool at least the people who did know him closely enough (like Tywin, Robert, Ned, Jon Arryn etc.). The point in switching Aegon and not Rhaenys as well was to save the rightful heir to the Iron Throne. Rhaenys would not have had to die. I guess if Ned had captured Elia and her children, he would not have been able to save Prince Aegon, but he would have saved Rhaenys and Elia. Elia would have made a fine hostage to ensure Doran's good behavior, and Rhaenys could have become a ward of the crown and the future queen of Robert's heir.

But Aegon had to go. That much Varys could easily foresee. They could not allow the son of Rhaegar to live on. He would have become the figurehead of the Targaryen loyalists throughout Robert's whole reign.

[A Wolf of Winterfell]

Too literal? If one were to take it literally, it would be a prophecy about Dany attending a popular mummer's show.

Yes, you could have been even more literal in your example. Regardless, giving your own version of how the prophesy should have been told to conclude your argument on why it can or cannot mean this or that is pure conjecture. It's not evidence of anything, that was more the point I was making.

The question remains, why use the imagery of a fake dragon at all, if it's just about a random enemy she'll have to fight? In fact, what kind of a lame prophecy is it to tell Dany "There'll be some enemies you must overcome in your future"? I mean, at this point she already has a list of rather impressive enemies, that would hardly constitute a revelation.

And the idea of "Aegon" being false doesn't just hinge on this prophecy, it's various plot points coming together.

I don't think it is a random enemy, it's definitely a major player. The prophesy could very well refer to a Targaryen, but does it have to be Aegon? It could be Jon, since it's likely he is Rhaegar's son. Not only is he half Targaryen, but it's also likely that she would perceive him as an enemy given that he is usurper spawn as far as she knows. Not to mention we have no idea where Jon's path will lead him after his little incident at the wall.

What plot points are you referring to? There has been nothing conclusive as of yet, nor any evidence that I've read that definitively indicates he is a fake. But it's possible I've missed the obvious.

The part of the book that nags at me the most regarding Aegon's authenticity is the things the Undying told and showed Dany in addition to the mummer's dragon. Before they give her the prophecy of the three fires, three mounts, and three treasons they say to her,

...mother of dragons...child of three...

"Three?" She did not understand.

...three heads has the dragon...

To me a child of three implies she is one of three from Jaehaerys'(he was the one the original PTWP prophesy was given to, right?) bloodline. I interpret that the three children have to be from the Targaryen bloodline given that the Undying explain their comment to Dany by saying "three heads has the dragon"

Also earlier when Dany sees the vision of her brother with baby Aegon.

"Aegon," he said to a woman nursing a newborn babe in a great wooden bed. "What better name for a king?"

"Will you make a song for him?" the woman asked.

"He has a song," the man replied. "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire." He looked up when he said it and his eyes met Dany's, and it seemed as if he saw her standing there beyond the door. "There must be one more," he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in the bed she could not say. "The dragon has three heads."

If Aegon was thought to be the PTWP it makes sense that Varys would go to great lengths to smuggle him out of the country before the enemy could come crashing through the door. Varys was able to get Tyrion of all people out of Kingslanding, why not a baby?

If Aegon is fake, than who is the third head from the "the child of three" prophesy? Dany is one, and I'm assuming that we all agree Jon is most likely the second, if this child calling himself Aegon is not the third, than who is?

[Banner of Black and Gold]

Aegon grew on me during the short time we actually get to know him in the book, and now I have to say he's my favourite Targ. Well, at least I hope he is one. ;)

I know that he will most likely either: a) die sooner rather than later; or b ) prove to be a fake. But one can still hope, right?

[A Wolf of Winterfell]

The three heads are part of no prophecy, explicitly.

Maybe, maybe not, I tend to believe the three heads are those on the targaryen sigil: the family figureheads, and actual dragons and riders are a separate matter, even though there is obviously a huge potential overlap, in that family heads will likely get preference in the dragon-riding department.

The dragon with three heads is explicitly prophesied, given twice in the House of the Undying. I quoted the snippets in the post above.

I would also agree that the three riders are not necessarily one in the same with the three heads/child of three prophesy. I'm not even entirely sure I believe all three dragons are going to survive till the end of the book. Especially since two of them are flying wild all over Meereen. Maybe Dany will be able to call them all to her, but I imagine it won't be an easy task. Lots of devastation and bloodshed and maybe a dead dragon, who knows?

[Jon AS]

I don't think it is a random enemy, it's definitely a major player. The prophesy could very well refer to a Targaryen, but does it have to be Aegon? It could be Jon, since it's likely he is Rhaegar's son. Not only is he half Targaryen, but it's also likely that she would perceive him as an enemy given that he is usurper spawn as far as she knows. Not to mention we have no idea where Jon's path will lead him after his little incident at the wall.

I guess Jon could be an option, except if R+L=J he is a real dragon, not a fake one, and he gets his own image in the "bride of fire" visions: "A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness..."

What plot points are you referring to? There has been nothing conclusive as of yet, nor any evidence that I've read that definitively indicates he is a fake. But it's possible I've missed the obvious.

What I meant was that Aegon was killed in a manner that is just way too convenient for a baby switch and we have only Varys' word (which Tyrion, one of the smartest characters in the books, doubts) that he did indeed switch the babies. Varys' entire plan hinges on nobody noticing that the baby, whose death wasn't even certain when the switch took place, is killed and nobody notices that he is not, in fact, Aegon. It's not like there aren't servants around in the Red Keep who could identify the child's corpse, but luckily Gregor Clegane smashed his head so nobody can tell whether it's him.

Then you have Illyrio and his suspicious behaviour. He could have just formed an attachement to the kid when he was in his care, but he still seems to feel awfully strongly for a child whose primary caregiver he hasn't been for at least a dozen years and whom he only took in because he meant to use him as a political pawn. Kinda makes you wonder.

To me a child of three implies she is one of three from Jaehaerys'(he was the one the original PTWP prophesy was given to, right?) bloodline. I interpret that the three children have to be from the Targaryen bloodline given that the Undying explain their comment to Dany by saying "three heads has the dragon"

"Child of" is usually used to refer to someone's parents. I think this is more in line with the "daughter of death" bit, three important events/people that shaped Dany into the person she is and set her on her path.

[Cromm]

Hello there! I'm new to the forums so take it easy on me if I make stupid mistakes./noob

Another possibility... Tyrion is the mummer. He did learn to joust on dogback. And that would make Daenerys the mummer's dragon, wouldn't it? Granted, this stretches plausibility.

Tyrion's parentage has been questioned enough on this forum that I'm surprised that this has only been brought up once. He qualifies as a mummer and there is a possibility (although distant) that he is a Targaryen.

"Prophecies are abstract", remember? So maybe the mummer's dragon isn't a person after all. A friend of mine recently brought about the possibility that it refers to the money promised by Tyrion to Ben Plumm (gold dragons). In this case the 'Mummer's Dragon' would refer to 'Lannister Coin'. It was a lot of coin that Tyrion will counting on Daenerys to deliver to him, so to speak, by naming him Lord of Casterly Rock.

[Ray Berti]

Am I the only one who thinks that "mummer's dragon" refers to the dragon that Tyrion (who has for some time been a mummer) will eventually be riding?

[Dragonfish]

If Aegon is fake, than who is the third head from the "the child of three" prophesy? Dany is one, and I'm assuming that we all agree Jon is most likely the second, if this child calling himself Aegon is not the third, than who is?

Tyrion could be the third head (whether he's a Targ or not). George has said that the third head need not be a Targaryen.