Quaithe & Aegon's legitemacy.

[Malgarroth]

I've been analysing this one line from Quaithe regarding the people who are coming to Daenerys in ADWD.

"No. Hear me, Daenerys Targaryen. The glass candles are burning. Soon comes the pale mare, and after her the others. Kraken and dark flame, lion and griffin, the sun's son and the mummer's dragon. Trust none of them. Remember the Undying. Beware the perfumed seneschal."

Okay. So we can see here that those that are coming are arranged in pairs here, grouping together members of the various parties.

Kraken and dark flame = Victarion, Morroqo and the Iron Fleet.

Lion and Griffin = Tyrion, both Griffs (young & old) and the rest of their party.

The sun's son and the mummer's dragon = Quentyn Martell and his companions.

Leading me to believe that Quentyn is in fact the mummer's dragon.

Look at it literally for a second, I think she's sayying that Quentyn is the sun's son and the mummer's dragon.

He claimed to have Targ blood, claimed himself to be a dragon and when it came to test the truth of his convictions he was slain.

Slain, by a dragon. Who belonged to the Mother of Dragons, slayer of lies. So, Dany did in fact slay the lie of the mummer's dragon, if indirectly. (Hey, prophecy is funny like that)

Meaning that if Quentyn was the mummer's dragon, then Aegon can't be.

You may ask "Why did GRRM plant the seeds of doubt about Aegon?" and my answer is: George likes to f*ck with us, the message he's been plying us with for the last five books has, much of the time, been "Question everything"

Thoughts?

[The Mother of Dragons]

I'd like to agree, but I can't see Aegon being something other than a Blackfyre due to his late appearance in the series. I've been thinking about Daenerys' visions in the House of the Undying, and it may be possible that each "mummer's dragon" are separate people, maybe Quentyn is from the vision and Aegon is the mummer's dragon from Quaithe's prophecy? I know, it's a bit farfetched.

[ViserionsFire]

Hi Mal

I was under the impression that Quentyn went to Dany to fulfill a marriage pact, not to declare that he was the Targaryen heir and entitled to the throne.

On the other hand we have Aegon who claims to be Targaryen and the rightful heir (Dragon).

[Malgarroth]

I'd like to agree, but I can't see Aegon being something other than a Blackfyre due to his late appearance in the series. I've been thinking about Daenerys' visions in the House of the Undying, and it may be possible that each "mummer's dragon" are separate people, maybe Quentyn is from the vision and Aegon is the mummer's dragon from Quaithe's prophecy? I know, it's a bit farfetched.

I don't know, I can't see GRRM bending to preconceptions that way, it's just not his style. Perhaps the reason for his late entry into the books is that we (the fans) have been pretty sure we know who two of the heads of the dragon are for a while now. It would make sense to reveal the third later in the series. And unless A+J=T is true, I don't see any other Targaryens around who are able to be the third head (although the image of Maester Aemon riding Rhaegal gives me giggles)

I see it like this: Drogon for Dany in honor of Drogo and the fact that he parallels the Black Dread an awful lot adding to the conqueror theme. Viserion for Jon, a white dragon and a white wolf for Lord Snow. And Rhaegal for Aegon, in honor of his dead father.

Although it would be just too perfect if Tyrion gets to ride one of them, he's dreamed of it his whole life.

EDIT: The idea of there being two mummer's dragons is interesting, but I do think Quaithe is referring to the HoTU in this instance. "Remember the Undying, remember who you are." (Slayer of lies?)

[Malgarroth]

Hi Mal

I was under the impression that Quentyn went to Dany to fulfill a marriage pact, not to declare that he was the Targaryen heir and entitled to the throne.

On the other hand we have Aegon who claims to be Targaryen and the rightful heir (Dragon).

Yeah, that's why he went to Mereen, but while there he claimed he had the blood of the dragon in order to convince Daenerys to marry him.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

But if you view the two as being the same, are you also saying that the "lion and griffin" and the "kraken and dark flame" are also the same person?

If you're getting tripped up on the thematic thing that links them, I'd say it's the marriage proposals. Both of them want(ed) to marry Dany.

I think they're two different people. The sun's son is Quentyn and the mummer's dragon is Aegon. The griffin is one person, and it's Connington.

[Malgarroth]

But if you view the two as being the same, are you also saying that the "lion and griffin" and the "kraken and dark flame" are also the same person?

If you're getting tripped up on the thematic thing that links them, I'd say it's the marriage proposals. Both of them want(ed) to marry Dany.

I think they're two different people. The sun's son is Quentyn and the mummer's dragon is Aegon. The griffin is one person, and it's Connington.

That's not what I'm saying.

The point I make here is that each group of companions is referred to separately. Why would she go from talking about Victarion's party then to Griff's party, then to Quentyn's then back to Griffs?

I see four different elements here:

1. The Pale Mare.

2. The Kraken and dark flame.

3. The lion and griffin.

4. The sun's sun and mummer's dragon.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

That's not what I'm saying.

The point I make here is that each group of companions is referred to separately. Why would she go from talking about Victarion's party then to Griff's party, then to Quentyn's then back to Griffs?

I'm saying that what links them thematically isn't really the "party," it's that they both want a marriage alliance. You're thinking of it too narrowly.

[ViserionsFire]

Yeah, that's why he went to Mereen, but while there he claimed he had the blood of the dragon in order to convince Daenerys to marry him.

In Mereen, even Ben Plumb claims to have Targ blood. Does that also make him suspect? What I was saying about Quentyn was that he didn't consider himself to be the rightful heir and Aegon does.

[Malgarroth]

I'm saying that what links them thematically isn't really the "party," it's that they both want a marriage alliance. You're thinking of it too narrowly.

And yet the evidence that Aegon is a fake is rock solid?

Don't tell me I'm thinking wrongly, I've looked at every shred of evidence on Aegon's legitemacy and this is my theory based on everything that I've looked at. Why can't it be as valid as your theories?

In Mereen, even Ben Plumb claims to have Targ blood. Does that also make him suspect? What I was saying about Quentyn was that he didn't consider himself to be the rightful heir and Aegon does.

No, Ben didn't try to tame a dragon. Quentyn did, he tried to become a head of the dragon and was proved wrong.

I'm not saying that Quentyn though of himself as THE heir, just that he saw himself as A dragon.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

And yet the evidence that Aegon is a fake is rock solid?

Don't tell me I'm thinking wrongly, I've looked at every shred of evidence on Aegon's legitemacy and this is my theory based on everything that I've looked at.

I think the evidence overwhelmingly points to Aegon being fake. You can disagree if you want, but I think you're going to end up disappointed. I also see no reason why the "sun's son" and "mummer's dragon" have to be the same person when none of the other pairs are the same person. Why would THIS pair refer to just one person, but not the others?

I didn't tell you that you were "wrong," I said that if you think of it only in terms of traveling "parties" and not in other terms (like, say, marriage proposals), you're unnecessarily hamstringing yourself and limiting your options.

[Malgarroth]

I think the evidence overwhelmingly points to Aegon being fake. You can disagree if you want, but I think you're going to end up disappointed. I also see no reason why the "sun's son" and "mummer's dragon" have to be the same person when none of the other pairs are the same person. Why would THIS pair refer to just one person, but not the others?

I didn't tell you that you were "wrong," I said that if you think of it only in terms of traveling "parties" and not in other terms (like, say, marriage proposals), you're unnecessarily hamstringing yourself and limiting your options.

I think "disappointed" is the wrong word. Whether he's Rhaegar's or not Dany might kill him anyway. I don't see her marrying anyone with even the Targ look after her relationship with Viserys, and if she won't marry the rival conqueror, he becomes an enemy.

It's not that I want Aegon to be real, it's just that I think that he is.

EDIT: None of the other pairs are the same person, no, but who else is with Quentyn that is of note? He makes enough protestations about him being of the blood of the dragon, enough to convince himself that he's destined to ride a dragon. He is slain because of it. Every other entity in that list is explained within ADWD. Pale mare = obvious, lion and griffin = Tyrion (obvious) and the Lord of Griffin's roost. Kraken and dark flame = Victarion (obvious again) and Morroqo, Sun's son = quentyn.

Why would the last part be left out? Unless it wasn't, unless there was a big ol' chapter discussing the mummer's dragon trying to tame a dragon and failing.

It may not matter either way, Dany could interpret Aegon as the mummer's dragon regardless of whether he actually is or not.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

It's not that I want Aegon to be real, it's just that I think that he is.

And if you think that, that's your prerogative. But I still think it's inaccurate to see the sun's son and the mummer's dragon as the same person. Even though I think Aegon is a fraud, I just want to point out that if Varys is the one pulling those strings, "mummer's dragon" can just as easily just mean "Varys' dragon," without having to mean that he's fake. So even if you think "Aegon" is real, there's no reason why he couldn't still be the mummer's dragon, just in the context of "Varys' dragon" and not "fake dragon." I think he's both — a fake dragon, and Varys' dragon — but it doesn't have to be read that way.

[Malgarroth]

And if you think that, that's your prerogative. But I still think it's inaccurate to see the sun's son and the mummer's dragon as the same person. Even though I think Aegon is a fraud, I just want to point out that if Varys is the one pulling those strings, "mummer's dragon" can just as easily just mean "Varys' dragon," without having to mean that he's fake. So even if you think "Aegon" is real, there's no reason why he couldn't still be the mummer's dragon, just in the context of "Varys' dragon" and not "fake dragon." I think he's both — a fake dragon, and Varys' dragon — but it doesn't have to be read that way.

Oh I agree with you there. It could mean Varys' dragon, except for that Dany is supposed to be the "Slayer of Lies" and in the vision she sees an actual fake cloth dragon.

Also, I believe that the Perfumed Seneschal is Varys, rather than the mummer behind the dragon.

[Ragnorak]

Dany brought Quenton to see the dragons because the dragon must have three heads. She was basically toying with the idea of Quenton as one of the riders as a way to seal the Dorne alliance instead of marriage. Quenton never tried to pose as a dragon, he factually stated that he had a Targ ancestor. I sort of like the Slayer of Lies part woven in but I don't think there's much of anything fake about Quenton. If it was beware the mummer's sellsword maybe. Quenton's only mummery display was hiding his identity on the way to Dany.

[Malgarroth]

Dany brought Quenton to see the dragons because the dragon must have three heads. She was basically toying with the idea of Quenton as one of the riders as a way to seal the Dorne alliance instead of marriage. Quenton never tried to pose as a dragon, he factually stated that he had a Targ ancestor. I sort of like the Slayer of Lies part woven in but I don't think there's much of anything fake about Quenton. If it was beware the mummer's sellsword maybe. Quenton's only mummery display was hiding his identity on the way to Dany.

The quote is "Trust none of them. Beware the perfumed seneschal" Not "Beware the mummer's dragon"

And, as I've mentioned, he believe's that he's destined to ride a dragon due to his bloodline and that belief is proved false. I know he doesn't run around yelling "I'm a dragon, I'm a Targaryen" it's more subtle than that.

Is it so absurd that we're being led to believe that Aegon is the mummer's dragon so that we can be surprised later? Is it such an odd idea that the least obvious answer is the correct one? Surely not! GRRM doesn't do plot twists! -_-

Just saying, if Rhaegal gets all cuddly with Aegon, it's a pretty safe bet that he's a Targaryen. Dragons are good at seeing through bullshit.

[QuaitheTheShadow]

Griffin is Connington.

Ageon is Vary's (mummer's) dragon.

(I should have been clearer)

[danm_999]

That theory makes no sense. Why would the first two pairs of symbols both refer to two distinct people, and the last pair refer to a single person?

[Ragnorak]

And yet the evidence that Aegon is a fake is rock solid?

I've looked at every shred of evidence on Aegon's legitemacy...

Out of curiosity, what is the evidence on Aegon's legitemacy? Serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. We're told Varys smuggled him out of KL but I am not aware of a single contemporary source that even hints at backing this up-- like Ned remembering people being gathered up after he arrives at KL and Varys coming in last. There are people like Jon Connington and Septa Lemore who believe but we have no indication they were ever involved in smuggling Aegon out so that only tells us that they believe Varys. I can't find a single piece of evidence for Aegon being real other than that it is asserted. I can't even find subtle plot hints like a Jaime remembering ships fleeing KL during the sack or that the even dock workers were killed during the sack. If it turns out the baby Septa Lemore had was the one swapped for Aegon that would be evidence but I haven't seen any hint of that either.

[Malgarroth]

Out of curiosity, what is the evidence on Aegon's legitemacy? Serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. We're told Varys smuggled him out of KL but I am not aware of a single contemporary source that even hints at backing this up-- like Ned remembering people being gathered up after he arrives at KL and Varys coming in last. There are people like Jon Connington and Septa Lemore who believe but we have no indication they were ever involved in smuggling Aegon out so that only tells us that they believe Varys. I can't find a single piece of evidence for Aegon being real other than that it is asserted. I can't even find subtle plot hints like a Jaime remembering ships fleeing KL during the sack or that the even dock workers were killed during the sack. If it turns out the baby Septa Lemore had was the one swapped for Aegon that would be evidence but I haven't seen any hint of that either.

I do apologize, again not being sarcastic :P

I misspoke. I should have said: I've looked at every shred of "evidence" on Aegon's illegitemacy.

But that is exactly the point. There's no hard evidence either way.

But I am pretty certain that Jon Connington would know something was up. He knew Rhaegar intimately, he migt just be deluding himself but I'm sure he'd know whether this kid was half Targ and half Dornish, as well as the son of his best friend.

The point here is that one could swing either way, my personal belief is the one I described.

I understand that people may feel cheated by Aegon showing up so late in the game, but isn't that kinda the point? This keeps the plot exciting, I remember yelling aloud "No f'cking way!" when I first read the YG/Aegon reveal.