[ADwD Spoilers]The Mummers dragon

[Ser Pistus]

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.

Dany is a sure choice for the rider of Drogon, I agree.

In the other two, are you really serious? Tyrion a Targaryen, that is one of the weakest crackpot theories out there, reinforced by really ridiculous arguments. For example, it is obvious that Targaryens are not immune to diseases, King Daeron and his grandsons died in the Great Spring Sickness, Egg's brother died of a pox, counterexamples are all around us. All these greyscale speculations go down the drain.

"Jon is obviously Azor Ahai"? Come on, Daenerys is obviously Azor Ahai, despite the fact that some weak hints were thrown on in Dance that Jon might be it. Daenerys was the one who woke dragons from stone.

[Ser Pistus]

I like the notion that Tyrion might be a dragonrider, but it is really unfounded. The only possible argument is Tyrion's dragon dreams. However, Shireen also dreamed of dragons, and probably Viserys too.

Jon Snow as a dragonrider is a stretch, even if he is the son of Rhaegar. Jon is a guy with a direwolf, not a guy with a dragon.

[Cydal]

I think the Mummer's dragon is Aegon. In that link to the video conversation, they point out that 'Aegon' is a couple years younger than he should be.

I believe that 'Aegon' is really Ned Stark and Ashara Dayne's son. When Ned brings the Ser Arthur Dayne's sword back to Starfall, he also has Rhaegar and Lyanna's son with him, which he will take to Winterfell as his bastard. Ashara actually does have Ned's bastard and she (or they) decide to take Ned's bastard to the Free Cities, but to do so, Ashara somehow convinces Varys that the bastard is really 'Aegon', so he sends 'Aegon' to his good friend Illyrio to bring up.

As both men believe 'Aegon' is Aegon, they convince Jon Connington that 'Aegon' is Aegon, thus the Mummer's dragon. Just a curious point which might mean nothing, but Connington has the word 'con' in it. Con as in confidence trick. They all trick themselves into believing that the boy is the rightful heir to the Targaryen throne.

I hope that 'Aegon' does survive and somehow finds out the truth and then meets up with Jon Snow. With Jon unlikely to want the the throne, 'Aegon' may actual get to sit on it. Until Daenerys turns up...

Why would Ned & Ashara's child look like a Targ? Why take Ned's bastard to the free cities? he's under no danger for being their child. This is certainly a good idea of a crackpot theory. WOW

[Ser Arthyr Dracenstein]

I remember someone saying the Daynes had kind-of Targaryen looks without having Targaryen blood (Valyrian blood maybe?). And to take Ned's bastard there as 'Aegon' might draw attention away from Jon.

If people believe 'Aegon' is in the Free Cities, they might not think to look for other Targaryens elsewhere.

[variance]

That sort of makes his choice of words odd, though. According to the transcript, George specifically said that the third head need not be a Targaryen, not that the three heads in general need not be Targs. This would imply that the other two heads must be Targs, and that there is at least one more Targ than Dany out there (presumably Jon). Of course, I suppose it's possible that whoever transcribed his words was merely mistaken, so it's best to take the transcript with a grain of salt.

Jon isn't a Targaryen though, he is a Snow. Now Aegon is a Targ (assuming he is real).

I remember someone saying the Daynes had kind-of Targaryen looks without having Targaryen blood (Valyrian blood maybe?). And to take Ned's bastard there as 'Aegon' might draw attention away from Jon.

If people believe 'Aegon' is in the Free Cities, they might not think to look for other Targaryens elsewhere.

It was the opposite though. They knew 2 Targaryens were in the Free Cities, thus concealing Aegon.

[Jon AS]

Jon isn't a Targaryen though, he is a Snow.

It's possible that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married. There's precedence for polygamy with house Targaryen after all.

[TWR]

I think the Mummer's dragon is Aegon. In that link to the video conversation, they point out that 'Aegon' is a couple years younger than he should be.

I believe that 'Aegon' is really Ned Stark and Ashara Dayne's son. When Ned brings the Ser Arthur Dayne's sword back to Starfall, he also has Rhaegar and Lyanna's son with him, which he will take to Winterfell as his bastard. Ashara actually does have Ned's bastard and she (or they) decide to take Ned's bastard to the Free Cities, but to do so, Ashara somehow convinces Varys that the bastard is really 'Aegon', so he sends 'Aegon' to his good friend Illyrio to bring up.

As both men believe 'Aegon' is Aegon, they convince Jon Connington that 'Aegon' is Aegon, thus the Mummer's dragon. Just a curious point which might mean nothing, but Connington has the word 'con' in it. Con as in confidence trick. They all trick themselves into believing that the boy is the rightful heir to the Targaryen throne.

I hope that 'Aegon' does survive and somehow finds out the truth and then meets up with Jon Snow. With Jon unlikely to want the the throne, 'Aegon' may actual get to sit on it. Until Daenerys turns up...

I had a theory kinda like this, but in reverse. I think 'Aegon' might be Rhaegar and Lyanna's son & Jon is Ned & Ashara's. If R&L's kid had the Targ coloring & Lyanna made Ned promise to keep her son safe this makes sense.

Crackpot I know, but I really don't want R+L=J. I like Jon as a broody bastard who's just trying to get by. Let 'Aegon' be the secret savior who's probably going to get roasted by his impulsive & entitled aunt.

[variance]

It's possible that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married. There's precedence for polygamy with house Targaryen after all.

Adopted by a Stark though.

[Jon AS]

Adopted by a Stark though.

It's not like Westeros is that beaurocratic. Ned just said he was his son and nobody questioned it. Of course, I don't think whether Jon was born out of wedlock or not will be hugely important.

[variance]

It's not like Westeros is that beaurocratic. Ned just said he was his son and nobody questioned it. Of course, I don't think whether Jon was born out of wedlock or not will be hugely important.

Bureaucracy and Westeros has nothing to do with it. This is about determining what GRRM meant by it not needing to be a Targaryen.

[Jon AS]

Bureaucracy and Westeros has nothing to do with it. This is about determining what GRRM meant by it not needing to be a Targaryen.

If you say so. By the way, while you're reading the author's mind, could you clear up this "Aegon" thing?:P

ETA; Sorry, I misread that post. It's an idea, but I think "not a Targaryen" means not related to that family at all.

[variance]

If you say so. By the way, while you're reading the author's mind, could you clear up this "Aegon" thing?:P

ETA; Sorry, I misread that post. It's an idea, but I think "not a Targaryen" means not related to that family at all.

I don't think it means that at all. The point if fulfillment of the prophecy of which all 3 would come from Targaryen blood.

There are lots of people running around with Targaryen blood that aren't Targaryen. For example, the Blackfyres aren't Targaryens. They are of the Targaryen bloodline, even legitimized, but they aren't Targaryen. The Martells aren't Targaryens either, but they have a lot of Targaryen blood.

It is interesting that he used the phrase that the third head doesn't necessarily have to be a Targaryen. That means he could have had a slip of the tongue. Aegon could really be Aegon Targaryen, the second head, and he meant some other person without the Targaryen name could be the third head.

[Jon AS]

I guess I just don't care all that much for special bloodlines. I like the idea that anybody who is smart and brave enough could become a dragonrider.

[woze]

First of all there are 3 strong reasons as to why Aegon is a "real" Targaryan.

1) Beware the "Mummer's" dragon not beware the 'mummer' dragon which means Dragon belonging to a mummer which would be Aegon being Varys's tool not a fake dragon.

2) Aegon was coloring his hair to hide his true Targaryan hair color.

3) Varys confesses the true existence of Aegon to Kevan Lannister as he gets killed. Why tell the truth to a dying man? And evidence (smashed face on baby) exists to show that this was another child that was killed during Robert's rebellion and not Aegon.

As far as the 3 headed dragon I strongly think that Jon is not the third dragon. He is a Stark of which I'm 100% confident seeing as he has the same ability to warg with his wolf as the other stark children do. Plus his strong resemblance to Arya. He may not be Eddard's son and maybe the son of Brandon or Lyanna.

As for the third dragon while reading the story I thought that Ben Plumm would be one of the dragon riders we know the dragons liked him because of his Targaryan blood. And now Tyrion is with him who had more knowledge about dragons than probably anyone left alive on all the continents from reading all those books of dragons. If anyone can teach Ben Plumm about and how to ride a Dragon it will be Tyrion. And it just so happens that Tyrion and Ben Plumm are sitting outside Mereen with 2 dragons on the lose.

[Golden Skull]

At some point Tyrion is told that bright dragons and dark dragons, old dragons and new dragons are in the future.

My crackpot theory is that the third head isn't a Targ but a Aegon who is a Blackfyre. Blackfyre's sigil is a red dragon, which is the bright dragon compared to the black dragon of the Targs.

[variance]

As far as the 3 headed dragon I strongly think that Jon is not the third dragon. He is a Stark of which I'm 100% confident seeing as he has the same ability to warg with his wolf as the other stark children do. Plus his strong resemblance to Arya. He may not be Eddard's son and maybe the son of Brandon or Lyanna.

As for the third dragon while reading the story I thought that Ben Plumm would be one of the dragon riders we know the dragons liked him because of his Targaryan blood. And now Tyrion is with him who had more knowledge about dragons than probably anyone left alive on all the continents from reading all those books of dragons. If anyone can teach Ben Plumm about and how to ride a Dragon it will be Tyrion. And it just so happens that Tyrion and Ben Plumm are sitting outside Mereen with 2 dragons on the lose.

So Jon isn't a Targaryen because he looks like a Stark, but Plumm is... You do realize Ben Plumm is brown, right? That's as about a far away from Targaryen as you can get.

[Eaglewood]

The thing is - the eventual appearance of "Aegon" was inevitable.

Basically, you have the perfect set-up for a pretender to the throne: the heir to the throne is murdered as an infant and murdered in such a way that he is unrecognizable. This is too good an opportunity to pass up. Someone is going to seize on it and claim that the babies were switched and that the heir to the throne is alive and well.

The pretender to the throne who claims to be descended from the true king is both a standard device in fiction and something that happened in European history over and over again. Some posters have claimed that "Aegon" is an unbelievable plot device. On the contrary, this is one of the more realistic events in the series. This kind of thing happened all the time.

If Aegon didn't exist (as a real baby switcheroo), he would have to be invented. And so he was. Cooked up by Varys and Illyrio. As Rhaegar's BFF, Jon Connington (who is "conned" into believing this story) is the perfect straight man to make people believe in the mummer's dragon.

And "mummer's dragon" absolutely means fake, no matter how you slice it. The "mummer's dragon means Varys's dragon" reading is clever, but it doesn't get around the fact that mummer's dragon also clearly implies fake dragon. And it doesn't get around the fact that you wouldn't refer to the true heir to the throne with a phrase as dismissive as "mummer's dragon."

I also think it significant that both times we get the big reveal about Young Griff's true identity (first to Tyrion and then to the Golden Company), it's completely anti-climactic.

The question is what are Varys and Illyrio up to. And why is the Golden Company supporting the wrong side of the Targaryen coin (from their perspective)?

Ahh... I just wanted to say thanks for writing this. Best summary I've seen and I agree 100%.

As to what Varys and Illyrio are up to... well that is one of the central mysteries of the entire series. So many things they do contradicts other things they say and do. I'm thinking about Varys leading to the Targs downfall by "poisoning" King Aerys ear, then protecting both that king's daughter and "grandson"... while never informing either one about the other. They are clearly playing a game over the head of everyone else, even Littlefinger. As the to what end I'm not yet sure, but by the time tWoW comes out I should have some crackpot theories.

[Frey Takes The Crown]

As to what Varys and Illyrio are up to... well that is one of the central mysteries of the entire series.

Well didn't they used to steal things, and then sell them back to the owners?

Could they be doing that on a continental scale?

[Narea]

At some point Tyrion is told that bright dragons and dark dragons, old dragons and new dragons are in the future.

My crackpot theory is that the third head isn't a Targ but a Aegon who is a Blackfyre. Blackfyre's sigil is a red dragon, which is the bright dragon compared to the black dragon of the Targs.

The Targaryen sigil is a red three-headed dragon in black field and a sigil of House Blackfyre is a black three-headed dragon in red field.

[Eaglewood]

Well didn't they used to steal things, and then sell them back to the owners?

Could they be doing that on a continental scale?

Possibly. But what would be the benefit of it? They have both been outrageously rich and powerful for two decades, with one of them wielding massive influence in Westeros and the other in Essos.