Aegon is real v2

[Lord of Dragonstone]

Basically, your case rests on taking Varys, the guy who operates via "men believe what I tell them to believe" at his word. Varys is indisputably trying to pass off Aegon as Rhaegar's son. But Varys has made his entire career on the art of persuasion, so this evidence is really rather questionable.

Varys does not really let Kevan "know" much of anything before he dies. That speech is a lot more about "Enlightened Monarchs" than "Rhaegar's son has returned," and the way it's delivered seems as though it's being said for an audience other than Kevan.

My opinion is that the speech is intended more for the reader than for Kevan. Gloating about what he's done to someone who can never spread the tale makes a good pretext for GRRM to give us some insight into Varys' mind. I think it's a similar mechanism as to when we hear Tywin laying plans while Arya is in the room. We could assume Tywin is trying to mislead her, or we could just accept that GRRM is using Arya as a means to get some sense of what Tywin is doing.

I haven't seen any plausible explanation as to why Varys would lie during that speech, and until we do I have no reason to doubt him.

There are lots of people in the world with Targaryen features, and we already know questions of authenticity will be a problem for him, with Dorne as the prime example so far.

Why is Dorne a prime example? Are you predicting that Arianne will end up rejecting Aegon's legitimacy?

Aegon also has purple eyes, while most people who seem to have Targaryen features tend to have blue eyes.

As for the bolded, again, you appear to have only a few comments available to you on repeat. You seem mightily confused on what 'evidence' means. You've tried to claim, spuriously, that evidence is no longer evidence once it is interpreted differently by different people. When I show that you are not, in fact, interpreting the evidence differently, you say we should just ignore the evidence. Then you arrive at saying that because you want to ignore the evidence, it's not evidence.

The best guess I can make about what's causing this confusion is that you think the word 'evidence' somehow means 'absolute confirmation,' which it does not actually mean. Evidence gives reason to come to a conclusion, it doesn't say that the conclusion is absolute. If the conclusion were never in doubt, there would never be an appeal to evidence. As we gather more and more evidence all leading to the same conclusion, the conclusion becomes much less in doubt. The idea that we should not discuss evidence until the conclusion is assured is, frankly, laughably absurd.

So, again, there is lots of evidence for the Blackfyre theory which, when taken together, offers very good reason to support its conclusion. Your arguments against this evidence don't, in fact, dispute the evidence but instead say that we should just ignore it- as you've done again just now. Saying we should ignore evidence is not in any way a reasonable argument, nor does it prove the nonexistence of evidence.

So at what point does this evidence brush aside all doubt? Does it refute someone who specifically testifies against it? When you say it does? I don't find the evidence in favour of Aegon remotely close to doing any of that, and you repeating over and over again "but there's evidence" doesn't change the fact that the evidence is simply not enough to establish Aegon as a Blackfyre, at least IMHO.

[Princess_of_Sunspear]

I think the real issue that demands our attention at this point in the thread is why would anyone be willing to buy a timeshare from a man known for his predilections for doublespeak and subterfuge, but not a friendly butterball. To me this can only be a sign of anti-butterball racialism, a vicious and disturbing prejudice if ever there was one.

I'm not buying anything from dear sweet Varys, because until WoW comes out, Aegon could be fake or not, it doesn't depend on me, it depends in whatever takes Martins fancy. He could double anything, make Varys and honest guy and then kill him, I just go on information that we have at hand right now. But notice how I don't insult people who insist he is fake, nor do I pretend that I know more than GRRM himself based on what Quaithe told me via Dany's pov.

You accuse me of anti-butterbumps racialism? You are welcome to defend your accusation with a sword! How very dare you!

Besides. We are presented with dead Aegon by Tywin (Tywin, ffs). Because the guy who would do anything to gain more influence for his family is more likely to be trustworthy than Varys? Robert, the guy who's hatred of Rhaegar trumps common sense?

[Facebookless Man]

lol, but yet, you're willing to "buy the timeshare" from Varys, as it pertains. Though, the notion that you question my moral turpitude more than Varys' delights me, I have to admit.

Oh for fuck's sake. So much for trying to end that doomed discussion in a civil manner. Foolish of me I guess.

I've tried a bit with Onion, I'm not gonna bother too much with you so if in trouble try reading it aloud or something.

Your attempt at being clever here is an implied theory that Varys is lying. If I disproved it (that Varys is lying) I would not need to present a positive case that Aegon is real to justifiedly adopt that position. Pretty simple huh?

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Why is Dorne a prime example? Are you predicting that Arianne will end up rejecting Aegon's legitimacy?

Aegon also has purple eyes, while most people who seem to have Targaryen features tend to have blue eyes.

Because we already know that Dorne has doubts, thus it is already a problematic issue.

So at what point does this evidence brush aside all doubt? Does it refute someone who specifically testifies against it? When you say it does? I don't find the evidence in favour of Aegon remotely close to doing any of that, and you repeating over and over again "but there's evidence" doesn't change the fact that the evidence is simply not enough to establish Aegon as a Blackfyre, at least IMHO.

Ok, so you're now admitting that there is, in fact, evidence. Progress. At no point does any evidence brush aside 'all doubt,' neither have I said it does. Nor have I been repeatedly insisting that there is evidence in attempt to prove a standard of absolutely certainty (a standard which I would never seek or hope to meet), but in response to your cycle of objections to the existence of evidence. We can move past that now that you've acknowledged the objective existence of evidence.

And with this acknowledgement we can see, clearly, that there is more evidence- lots more!- for fAegon being a Blackfyre, than there is for fAegon being real. Because while the Blackfyre theory has several distinct pieces of evidence, 'Aegon is real' rests solely on the word of Varys. And given that there is more evidence for the former than for the latter, we can see, clearly, that the former is far more likely.

[butterbumps!]

My opinion is that the speech is intended more for the reader than for Kevan. Gloating about what he's done to someone who can never spread the tale makes a good pretext for GRRM to give us some insight into Varys' mind. I think it's a similar mechanism as to when we hear Tywin laying plans while Arya is in the room. We could assume Tywin is trying to mislead her, or we could just accept that GRRM is using Arya as a means to get some sense of what Tywin is doing.

I haven't seen any plausible explanation as to why Varys would lie during that speech, and until we do I have no reason to doubt him.

You really do not consider the fact that there are spies all over the Red Keep to be convincing evidence that Varys might not be truthful about the fact that Aegon might not be real? If you don't consider this to be a convincing reason why Varys might not have corrected Kevan, then I can't take your objection seriously.

There's also the issue that Martin has never broken the 4th wall to address the reader directly in the previous 10k pages of text. Everything a character says serves an in-universe purpose, with no exceptions, so the idea that this is all for the reader doesn't hold up.

Lastly, I think maybe you should take another look at what Varys is actually saying there. He's not saying anything about Aegon as Rhaegar's son or the Targ heir. He's talking about how well suited Aegon is to rule in terms of training and responsibility.

[Mladen]

Not just Varys, there is also Tyrion, someone who is duped into thinking he is real despite not being told so by either Varys or Illyrio.

The people who stated that Aegon is dead throughout the series is repeated by people who were not present at the time KL fell- Tywin was presented with two corpses, covered them with a cloak, and presented them with Robert. Similar to how Theon presented two little boys, conveniently burned, how Manderly presented a smuggler with an onion in the mouth, conveniently dipped in resin, how Boltons presented Arya Stark, conveniently traumatised.

. Varys on the other hand was right there.

Tyrion's belief originates from Haldon, The people claiming Aegon is real can't prove their words. You have JonCon who wasn't with the boy until much later. Then we have Varys' words. The same Varys led Ned to believe that Ser Hugh participated in Jon Arryn's death and that Mountain killed him on behalf of Lannisters, but then we have found out who really stands behind Arryn's death, and that young boy Varys was talking about wasn't Ser Hugh. The same with the riddle about who killed Ned Stark. Varys never lies, but he is Aes Sedai of ASOIAF. His truths are never what you think they are. So, conversation with Kevan in that way is simply not sustainable proof.

And who knows anything about Aegon? His mother and sister, both dead. Varys, but this is Varys, so you immediately discount that. There is no one in present cast who knows anything about Aegon, given how old he was at the time of his death, and considering how little time anyone had to really know him. Which is why swapping him would have worked. Given how this sort of a swap has happened before- someone important being alive whilst believed dead, I don't see how it's implausible that this could happen to Aegon.

There is no single proof that he is not real either- and you conveniently ignore the points that do not fit neatly into your theory.

The problem with swapping is that the official story has so many holes. Why Elia wasn't saved, when she could have been easily saved? Why Elia didn't look for Rhaenys? How Varys knew he would need a boy for the swap? How Varys knew the swapping would actually work? All those questions create such holes in the story that there can be only one conclusion - it never happened. We are not talking here about some small inconsistency, we are actually talking about illogical and nonsensical story that leaves no doubt that it actually happened.

The theory about Aegon being Blackfyre has more proofs than you want to admit. It is not cooked from one POV's opinion, it isn't tainted by all POV's shortcomings. It is actually drawn from motifs throughout entire story, and is not based on some great love or hatred towards anyone. I doubt that anyone believes that Aegon would look different if he is Blackfyre and not genuine Targ. He is what he is...

[Princess_of_Sunspear]

Oh for fuck's sake. So much for trying to end that doomed discussion in a civil manner. Foolish of me I guess.

I've tried a bit with Onion, I'm not gonna bother too much with you so if in trouble try reading it aloud or something.

Your attempt at being clever here is an implied theory that Varys is lying. If I disproved it (that Varys is lying) I would not need to present a positive case that Aegon is real to justifiedly adopt that position. Pretty simple huh?

Yeah, it's a clear sign of oppression of those who don't think Aegon is fake for sure. Like I said before he could be anything. Shrödingers Aegon if you like- right now he's both real and fake.)

[butterbumps!]

Oh for fuck's sake. So much for trying to end that doomed discussion in a civil manner. Foolish of me I guess.

I've tried a bit with Onion, I'm not gonna bother too much with you so if in trouble try reading it aloud or something.

Your attempt at being clever here is an implied theory that Varys is lying. If I disproved it (that Varys is lying) I would not need to present a positive case that Aegon is real to justifiedly adopt that position. Pretty simple huh?

Respectfully, I thought your posts were among the most incendiary of the thread, so I'm not sure I agree with the idea of calling my light hearted ribbing uncivil.

I'm not implying Varys is lying exactly. I'm speaking to the scuffle over which side has the burden of proof and should be considered the "default" position. The only argument I was making is that "Aegon is Real" cannot be the default here because we've been given the "default" that Aegon is dead, and the only counter against this we've been given is the story conjured by Varys.

[Princess_of_Sunspear]

Tyrion's belief originates from Haldon, The people claiming Aegon is real can't prove their words. You have JonCon who wasn't with the boy until much later. Then we have Varys' words. The same Varys led Ned to believe that Ser Hugh participated in Jon Arryn's death and that Mountain killed him on behalf of Lannisters, but then we have found out who really stands behind Arryn's death, and that young boy Varys was talking about wasn't Ser Hugh. The same with the riddle about who killed Ned Stark. Varys never lies, but he is Aes Sedai of ASOIAF. His truths are never what you think they are. So, conversation with Kevan in that way is simply not sustainable proof.

The problem with swapping is that the official story has so many holes. Why Elia wasn't saved, when she could have been easily saved? Why Elia didn't look for Rhaenys? How Varys knew he would need a boy for the swap? How Varys knew the swapping would actually work? All those questions create such holes in the story that there can be only one conclusion - it never happened. We are not talking here about some small inconsistency, we are actually talking about illogical and nonsensical story that leaves no doubt that it actually happened.

The theory about Aegon being Blackfyre has more proofs than you want to admit. It is not cooked from one POV's opinion, it isn't tainted by all POV's shortcomings. It is actually drawn from motifs throughout entire story, and is not based on some great love or hatred towards anyone. I doubt that anyone believes that Aegon would look different if he is Blackfyre and not genuine Targ. He is what he is...

The holes in the official story were explained in this thread many, many times, and yet they are conveniently ignored by the proponents of Blackfyre theory. Elia was presumably harder to sneak out than a one year old child, Rhaenys ran into her fathers bedroom and his and then was found by Amory Lorch, whilst Elia was at hands of Gregor, which is why they weren't in the same room to begin with. Varys knew KL would fall or burn eventually, which increased the likelihood of Aegon being dead, so presumably, for Aegon to stay alive, someone would have to take his place so no questions are raised and he is kept a secret, and it would have to be a boy. Varys had no idea if it would work, but then, neither did Cersei, when she supplied Lancel with wine skins. Varys just took advantage of the situation and saved an important chess piece, one of the last descendants of a powerful family.

This is series where dumb plots work, ffs.

[Facebookless Man]

Respectfully, I thought your posts were among the most incendiary of the thread

Quite possibly, but not my exchange with OnionAhai on the topic in question! It's only a certain attitude that rubs me the wrong way.

The point about us being initially given "Aegon is dead" as default is a good one, but I think by "default" we aren't talking about the same thing. "X character is lying" can not be the default position as I mean it or it would be simply impossible to make sense of the story being told.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I'm not buying anything from dear sweet Varys, because until WoW comes out, Aegon could be fake or not, it doesn't depend on me, it depends in whatever takes Martins fancy. He could double anything, make Varys and honest guy and then kill him, I just go on information that we have at hand right now. But notice how I don't insult people who insist he is fake, nor do I pretend that I know more than GRRM himself based on what Quaithe told me via Dany's pov.

You accuse me of anti-butterbumps racialism? You are welcome to defend your accusation with a sword! How very dare you!

Besides. We are presented with dead Aegon by Tywin (Tywin, ffs). Because the guy who would do anything to gain more influence for his family is more likely to be trustworthy than Varys? Robert, the guy who's hatred of Rhaegar trumps common sense?

Yeah, it's a clear sign of oppression of those who don't think Aegon is fake for sure. Like I said before he could be anything. Shrödingers Aegon if you like- right now he's both real and fake.)

Ok, setting aside the important issue of butterball racialism for the nonce...

I've always found the claim that 'it could go either way' particularly odd. Real or fake, I really don't believe it could go 'either way.' I think GRRM certainly knows, and has done the necessary work to lay down clues so that the reader can form some very good guesses. This is how GRRM writes, as any number of threads on foreshadowing, symbolism, visions, etc pretty well demonstrates. So I really don't buy this argument that it could go either way depending on what GRRM decides, I'm certain he's decided. And one side is right, and the other is wrong. At this very moment.

There is a good deal of evidence (well more than just Quaithe's words) supporting him being a Blackfyre. There is Varys' word in favor of him being real. This being the case, I think it is obviously more likely the case that he is a Blackfyre than real, just based on comparing the amount of available evidence.

[Lord of Dragonstone]

Because we already know that Dorne has doubts, thus it is already a problematic issue.

How is it problematic? Do you predict Arianne to end up thinking Aegon is false?

Ok, so you're now admitting that there is, in fact, evidence. Progress. At no point does any evidence brush aside 'all doubt,' neither have I said it does. Nor have I been repeatedly insisting that there is evidence in attempt to prove a standard of absolutely certainty (a standard which I would never seek or hope to meet), but in response to your cycle of objections to the existence of evidence. We can move past that now that you've acknowledged the objective existence of evidence.

And with this acknowledgement we can see, clearly, that there is more evidence- lots more!- for fAegon being a Blackfyre, than there is for fAegon being real. Because while the Blackfyre theory has several distinct pieces of evidence, 'Aegon is real' rests solely on the word of Varys. And given that there is more evidence for the former than for the latter, we can see, clearly, that the former is far more likely.

More evidence =/= better evidence. The points that have been brought forward seem far too weak(IMO) to believe a conspiracy is the more likely explanation.

You really do not consider the fact that there are spies all over the Red Keep to be convincing evidence that Varys might not be truthful about the fact that Aegon might not be real? If you don't consider this to be a convincing reason why Varys might not have corrected Kevan, then I can't take your objection seriously.

If Varys was worried about spies, then why on earth would he kill Kevan and Pycelle, then say he would try to shift the blame on Tyrion and try to sow dissent and mistrust? If he was making the speech for someone else's benefit, wouldn't this "someone else" also know immediately what Varys is trying to do?

There's also the issue that Martin has never broken the 4th wall to address the reader directly in the previous 10k pages of text. Everything a character says serves an in-universe purpose, with no exceptions, so the idea that this is all for the reader doesn't hold up.

I don't think you know what breaking the 4th wall means. Varys gloating to Kevan is a perfectly viable reason for us getting some insight as to his motives.

Lastly, I think maybe you should take another look at what Varys is actually saying there. He's not saying anything about Aegon as Rhaegar's son or the Targ heir. He's talking about how well suited Aegon is to rule in terms of training and responsibility.

He puts Kevan under the impression that Aegon is legitimate. There is no reason that I can see for this deception.

[yolkboy]

If Aegon is real, meaning Illyrio is pro-Targ, why was he happy to send off Viserys with the Dothraki, with very very very little protection? Illyrio would have considered him his king.

That's not to mention the Blackfyre founded Golden Company laughing at Viserys, and then breaking contract to fight for Aegon.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

How is it problematic? Do you predict Arianne to end up thinking Aegon is false?

It's problematic because it indicates, whatever the Dornish decide, that questions of his authenticity will follow him.

More evidence =/= better evidence. The points that have been brought forward seem far too weak(IMO) to believe a conspiracy is the more likely explanation.

Piles of evidence > one piece of evidence that is just the word of Varys. Varys, ffs.

As an aside, if fAegon is real, his survival will be attributable to a 'conspiracy.'

If Aegon is real, meaning Illyrio is pro-Targ, why was he happy to send off Viserys with the Dothraki, with very very very little protection? Illyrio would have considered him his king.

That's not to mention the Blackfyre founded Golden Company laughing at Viserys, and then breaking contract to fight for Aegon.

This is not evidence because I don't like it. But have you perchance heard Varys' take on this subject? Now there's a man whose very essence screams 'trustworthy.'

[Mladen]

The holes in the official story were explained in this thread many, many times, and yet they are conveniently ignored by the proponents of Blackfyre theory. Elia was presumably harder to sneak out than a one year old child, Rhaenys ran into her fathers bedroom and his and then was found by Amory Lorch, whilst Elia was at hands of Gregor, which is why they weren't in the same room to begin with. Varys knew KL would fall or burn eventually, which increased the likelihood of Aegon being dead, so presumably, for Aegon to stay alive, someone would have to take his place so no questions are raised and he is kept a secret, and it would have to be a boy. Varys had no idea if it would work, but then, neither did Cersei, when she supplied Lancel with wine skins. Varys just took advantage of the situation and saved an important chess piece, one of the last descendants of a powerful family.

This is series where dumb plots work, ffs.

What was explained many times, and could you please point me in direction for it seems I have missed those explanations. Elia wasn't harder to sneak out because we know that Varys easily has sneaked out a grown up person quite easily. If Varys knew KL would burn, then he would know that bodies would be unrecognizable and he would have taken Elia with Aegon, thus there wouldn't be any story about legitimacy. No, Varys is not LF, he does not take giant logical leaps. As we have seen in ADWD with Kevan, he thinks about every detail. So, for him to actually do something like that, he would have to be certain that it would work. And comparing Varys with Cersei... :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[Lady Fevre Dream]

Quite possibly, but not my exchange with OnionAhai on the topic in question! It's only a certain attitude that rubs me the wrong way.

The point about us being initially given "Aegon is dead" as default is a good one, but I think by "default" we aren't talking about the same thing. "X character is lying" can not be the default position as I mean it or it would be simply impossible to make sense of the story being told.

OMG!!! More than ten pages since I left yesterday? Many characters are lying liars who lie?? No way. I have no time to catch up on this thread right now, but I look forward to trying to do so in the next few days. Well, that is provided we can still discuss whether Aegon is real, or fake, or dead, or..........hell, maybe he can be somewhere inbetween. How about an Un(F)Aegon or is that a 'default' situation, too? Oh, never mind, even if I could try and catch up on the thread right now, I suspect it will hit the closing mark of 400 or plus posts anyway.

[RoamingRonin]

If Aegon is real, meaning Illyrio is pro-Targ, why was he happy to send off Viserys with the Dothraki, with very very very little protection? Illyrio would have considered him his king.

That's not to mention the Blackfyre founded Golden Company laughing at Viserys, and then breaking contract to fight for Aegon.

Viserys would be impossible to manipulate. Viserys was the son of the Mad King, not the son of beloved Prince Rhaegar.

Everyone laughed at Viserys. The Beggar King, the Cart-King. I imagine he tried to convince them with speeches on waking the dragon. Besides: how could the Golden Company alone take on the unified 7-kingdoms?

[butterbumps!]

Quite possibly, but not my exchange with OnionAhai on the topic in question! It's only a certain attitude that rubs me the wrong way.

The point about us being initially given "Aegon is dead" as default is a good one, but I think by "default" we aren't talking about the same thing. "X character is lying" can not be the default position as I mean it or it would be simply impossible to make sense of the story being told.

Sure-- I wasn't really trying to single anyone out in that post, and I honestly did mean it as good-natured teasing.

I don't think "Varys is lying" is the default position exactly, though that becomes an adjacent question.

The way I see the Aegon debate is this:

Default position 1: Aegon is dead

Default position 2: Someone called "Aegon" shows up in book 5

I think the "Aegon is Real" side needs to make a convincing argument that the Aegon who shows up is actually Rhaegar's kid. Unfortunately, the evidence for this side comes exclusively from Varys' story (told to us through Jon Con/ Aegon himself), and is therefore subject to rather extreme scrutiny.

If Varys was worried about spies, then why on earth would he kill Kevan and Pycelle, then say he would try to shift the blame on Tyrion and try to sow dissent and mistrust? If he was making the speech for someone else's benefit, wouldn't this "someone else" also know immediately what Varys is trying to do?

I don't think you know what breaking the 4th wall means. Varys gloating to Kevan is a perfectly viable reason for us getting some insight as to his motives.

He puts Kevan under the impression that Aegon is legitimate. There is no reason that I can see for this deception.

What proof do these spies have against the evidence Varys is framing Tyrion with? I mean, Varys is staging the scene with physical evidence to implicate Tyrion, and he operates by spreading whispers to make people believe things. The spies would know it's Varys, but in the absence of recording devices, and with the evidence and whispers stacked for Tyrion, I don't think the witnesses would be much of an issue.

I know what breaking the 4th wall means. It's what you described when you said that Varys' exposition was written for the reader's benefit. A character who makes an address for no one's sake but the reader's is not something we've seen Martin do.

I really think you should look over the speech again. He's delivering an address about why Aegon is the true king, yet makes no mention, whatsoever, about the fact that he's allegedly Rhaegar's son, which would be the "normal" case to make in this circumstance. Varys' focus in that speech is not about who Aegon is, but rather, the Enlightened leader he's been trained to be. It deserves a further look.

[Facebookless Man]

There are other issues, such as the whole Aegon Blackfyre scheme being the lamest plan ever, but then again we already have LF's dagger shenanigans and Cersei's murder by boar as examples of brilliant scheming so everything is possible.

I just hope to God the story isn't just about Rightful Daenerys smiting the Vile Impostor that popped out of nowhere and added nothing to the plot.

[Lord of Dragonstone]

It's problematic because it indicates, whatever the Dornish decide, that questions of his authenticity will follow him.

The same questions could apply even if it were known here were saved. Dorne sending someone to treat with Aegon and look for any signs of deceit is simply common sense.

Piles of evidence > one piece of evidence that is just the word of Varys. Varys, ffs.

As an aside, if fAegon is real, his survival will be attributable to a 'conspiracy.'

I still haven't seen any good reason for Varys to lie. "Piles" of circumstantial evidence is still circumstantial evidence, and I'd object to using the term piles as it really is only a few things, none of which contradict Aegon as a Targaryen.

Aegon being smuggled out by a Targaryen loyalist is not a conspiracy. A conspiracy would be a bloodline long considered extinct secretly plotting to replace the royal line with one of their own. I mean, maybe you could consider Aegon being real as a conspiracy, but clearly the scope is on an entirely different level as the Blackfyre one.