My problem with Aegon being a Blackfyre

[Isobel Harper]

I'm just curious here: Let's just say under the assumption Aegon is not a Blackfyre, how would you say the house is integral to the story? I mean we're talking about information drops about how the house's line ended on the male side, how they were never really successful, how Barristan smashed the last of them, etc.

“Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon. When Maelys the Monstrous died upon the Stepstones, it was the end of the male line of House Blackfyre.” The cheesemonger smiled through his forked beard. “And Daenerys will give the exiles what Bittersteel and the Blackfyres never could. She will take them home.”

I see that used the most for evidence. It seems to me Illyrio and Varys just want to be able to throw someone they can use in Westeros for their strategy when the time made sense. Maybe they're trying to get all of the former Pre-rebellion exiles back, not necessarily a specific House so that's why they can shift their situations through real Targs and fake ones. It's for the better of the realm...and their strategy essentially makes real houses irrelevant whereas the knowing true house is the main pull for the theory.

With the 5-year gap taken out because of Slaver's Bay storylines, it seems the "Aegon" situation may have been inserted to fill the void of what initially attacks Westeros from the east coast. GRRM may have had to retool who would really have the power in the south yet make the region just as susceptible as it was originally intended on being before the dragons actually head over. Don't forget he originally wanted Dany in Westeros by the end of Book 2.

Also, I don't see many people speculating (f)Aegon/Aegon will survive so it begs the question: Why is this such an appealing topic when it will just result in the 5th failed Blackfyre rebellion in most people's eyes? The hints through these information drops could be much simpler and mean Varys and Illyrio's plan will mirror the failed rebellions, but they don't have to specifically be Blackfyres. The line is virtually nonexistent and if you think he dies anyways, then it makes it really pointless.

When reviewing fan speculation about the next two books, I see this all of the time. "But I expect he won't live that long, so he won't be that significant" covers almost all of the predictions for Aegon that I read. Really? Given his shocking reveal in ADoD, I truly don't expect GRRM to take Aegon's storyline "nowhere." His arrival as a player will disrupt everyone's "game."

As for the many people that assume he won't be significant and that debate the many "fAegon theories," I expect these people are either mutually exclusive to one another or trying to purport Aegon's insignificance.

[Isobel Harper]

1. A Blackfyre is still a Targaryen by blood. And half the whores in Lys supposedly look like Dany. Eight of the nine Free Cities are former Valyrian colonies. Blackfyre or just some brat, it's not out of the question to find a Valyrian-looking child in Essos, and there's no reason to think a Blackfyre child couldn't look like a Targaryen, especially if the Blackfyres have been marrying into other Valyrian families in Essos. What you should really be asking is, where the hell did Varys find a Valyrian-looking baby in FLEA BOTTOM?

2. The kid's age isn't perfect. Tyrion remarks that he looks a little young (although Tyrion may or may not be able to tell accurately). It's also possible that it was because they had this child whose age lined up that they sprung the plot now, when they did. They had the child and the cover story at the right time, so that's what they went with. If they had no child they could pass as Aegon, they wouldn't be carrying out the plot they are.

I must have missed where GRRM said that Aegon was real. Could you point me to it? Thanks.

“Aegon?” For a moment he did not understand. Then he remembered. A babe swaddled in a crimson cloak, the cloth stained with his blood and brains. “Dead. He’s dead.”

“No.” The eunuch’s voice seemed deeper. “He is here..."

I've seen this interaction dissected down to the point that others state that it supports Aegon being fake. Honestly, I think it would be poor to write Varys basically confessing that Aegon is alive to a dying man and to still have him lying to him. It's a classic case of Just Between You and Me. (The only good possible evidence I've seen against this is the theory Illyrio has even duped Varys.)

[barristan-b]

When reviewing fan speculation about the next two books, I see this all of the time. "But I expect he won't live that long, so he won't be that significant" covers almost all of the predictions for Aegon that I read. Really? Given his shocking reveal in ADoD, I truly don't expect GRRM to take Aegon's storyline "nowhere." His arrival as a player will disrupt everyone's "game."

As for the many people that assume he won't be significant and that debate the many "fAegon theories," I expect these people are either mutually exclusive to one another or trying to purport Aegon's insignificance.

But I guess that's what I'm saying: A large amount of people who say that are the one's who actually believe he's (f)Aegon. I don't get why one would support that but then deem him irrelevant. That's my confusion...in my view, these guys are still important, just not the Blackfyre name. It could very well be hinting at a similar situation, not the same family. Just throwing it out there.

[Isobel Harper]

But I guess that's what I'm saying: A large amount of people who say that are the one's who actually believe he's (f)Aegon. I don't get why one would support that but then deem him irrelevant. That's my confusion...in my view, these guys are still important, just not the Blackfyre name. It could very well be hinting at a similar situation, not the same family. Just throwing it out there.

Perhaps they're trying to rationalize his insignificance?

[Good Guy Garlan]

I know I'll get shit for this, but I honestly think it shouldn't be the readers' duty to know all the complementary material in order to fully enjoy or understand the main series.

Bloodraven showing up in the cave was a pretty big deal for the central plot, nowhere near easter egg material. Same goes for Aegon's potential reveal as a BF. And the significance of those moments would be lost on readers who have stuck only with the main series, no matter how many times GRRM mentions Bloodraven or the Blackfyres. Like, reading their name on a throwaway line means zilch compared to seeing the actual characters interact in D&E

[Eiko Dragonhorn]

I'm not sure what you mean. Please explain.

...

Whereas the CD story isn't about the creation of the GC.

It precisely is, I assumed you had read the GC = CD theory at least.

He forged a new sign for the yard, a three-headed dragon of black iron that he hung from a wooden post. The beast was so big it had to be made in a dozen pieces, joined with rope and wire. When the wind blew it would clank and clatter, so the inn became known far and wide as the Clanking Dragon.

Bittersteel saw the strength of House Blackfyre scattering to the four winds, so he formed the Golden Company to bind the exiles together.

The GC is the largest of the companies, joined together by Bittersteel just as the CD is a huge sign joined together by wire. The second quote also directly links the GC to the strength of House Blackfyre, making a Black Dragon a perfectly appropriate symbol.

hacked the sign into pieces, and cast them into the river.

we can always retreat back across the narrow sea, as Bittersteel once did, and others after him.

When Maelys died, the GC made one of their retreats across the narrow sea - they were cast into the "river" by Targ loyalists... Now they're washing back up onto Westeros led by a Targaryen, so that's why the black head turned red.

And don't forget what the GC wants.

A brotherhood of exiles and the sons of exiles, united by the dream of Bittersteel. It’s home they want, as much as gold.

“And Daenerys will give the exiles what Bittersteel and the Blackfyres never could. She will take them home.”

Nothing makes this theory more complicated that BlAegon, so how do you even try to use Occam's Razor again?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I've seen this interaction dissected down to the point that others state that it supports Aegon being fake. Honestly, I think it would be poor to write Varys basically confessing that Aegon is alive to a dying man and to still have him lying to him. It's a classic case of Just Between You and Me. (The only good possible evidence I've seen against this is the theory Illyrio has even duped Varys.)

Varys isn't lying. Aegon is alive and he is there. It's just not the Aegon Kevan is thinking of.

People who argue this forget two very important points.

1. Why say anything to Kevan? Forget lying to a dying man, why say anything to a dying man?

2. Kevan and Varys weren't alone in the room. http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/97015-conversation-with-a-dying-man-the-exact-wording-of-varys-and-kevans-talk/

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I know I'll get shit for this, but I honestly think it shouldn't be the readers' duty to know all the complementary material in order to fully enjoy or understand the main series.

Bloodraven showing up in the cave was a pretty big deal for the central plot, nowhere near easter egg material. Same goes for Aegon's potential reveal as a BF. And the significance of those moments would be lost on readers who have stuck only with the main series, no matter how many times GRRM mentions Bloodraven or the Blackfyres. Like, reading their name on a throwaway line means zilch compared to seeing the actual characters interact in D&E

If anything, Bloodraven proves that GRRM will include otherwise supplementary material/characters into the main plot despite rarely mentioning them in the main text before doing so. Is it fair that only people who've read D&E or other material would really know or appreciate why it was Brynden? Maybe not. But obviously he would do it because he's done it.

Bloodraven's presence as the Three-Eyed Crow shows that the "Aegon can't be a Blackfyre because they're not mentioned enough in the main series" argument is bunk.

ETA: I just looked it up. Apart from Bran actually interacting with him in the cave, Bloodraven is mentioned in the main series a whopping three times. Two of which are in ADWD, and one is in AFFC. So GRRM made a guy who'se mentioned three times in the story the Three-Eyed Crow, a central part of Bran's story and maybe the overall story. If he did that with Bloodraven, why do so many people think 14 Blackfyre mentions are too few to be significant?

[Isobel Harper]

Varys isn't lying. Aegon is alive and he is there. It's just not the Aegon Kevan is thinking of.

People who argue this forget two very important points.

1. Why say anything to Kevan? Forget lying to a dying man, why say anything to a dying man?

2. Kevan and Varys weren't alone in the room. http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/97015-conversation-with-a-dying-man-the-exact-wording-of-varys-and-kevans-talk/

Since Varys knew which Aegon Kevan was referring to, why mislead him? As to why Varys said anything, that the point of a "Just Between You and Me" - the ultimate plan reveal to another character for the reader's benefit.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Since Varys knew which Aegon Kevan was referring to, why mislead him? As to why Varys said anything, that the point of a "Just Between You and Me" - the ultimate plan reveal to another character for the reader's benefit.

You should maybe read the thread link I included.

Hint: It's not "Just Between You and Me."

[Red Wedding Cake]

The Aegon-Blackfyre idea isn't "dependent" on the D&E novellas. The novellas just provide more enthusiastic readers with a deeper understanding of the conflict. I could turn around and ask what the point is of making that conflict a huge part of the spinoff series if it had no role to play in the main series.

As for the Blackfyres being mentioned in the main series. The name first comes up in SoS, when Stannis is talking about traitors.

I count fourteen mentions of the word "Blackfyre" in the main series (using my tablet search function).

4 times in SoS

1 time in AFFC

9 times in ADWD

The book where we get the most detailed information about the Blackfyres is the book in which we first meet Aegon.

Not to mention that they show up in Theon's chapter, with Stannis talking about them.

It's almost as if, in anticipation of the Blackfyres becoming a part of the story, the author is ramping up mentions of them the closer the story gets to that point.

And a Blackfyre reference in Mercy's chapter with the Black Pearl, and a prophetic dream in Arianne's chapter about dragons dancing.

fAegon is something fun to look into while we wait. Like Jon Snow surviving and R+L=J. The devil is in the details.

:read:

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

And a Blackfyre reference in Mercy's chapter with the Black Pearl, and a prophetic dream in Arianne's chapter about dragons dancing.

Good catch. So that's at least twice in just the preview chapters that they've come up, plus the "dancing" vision. If that's just in the preview chapters, are many will be in the complete book?

[J. Stargaryen]

It precisely is, I assumed you had read the GC = CD theory at least.

Precisely? You've connected two passages from different books and declared them to be symbolic partners, based on a tenuous interpretation. Sorry if I don't take your word for it.

The GC is the largest of the companies, joined together by Bittersteel just as the CD is a huge sign joined together by wire. The second quote also directly links the GC to the strength of House Blackfyre, making a Black Dragon a perfectly appropriate symbol.

So Bittersteel = wire? Brilliant analysis.

When Maelys died, the GC made one of their retreats across the narrow sea - they were cast into the "river" by Targ loyalists... Now they're washing back up onto Westeros led by a Targaryen, so that's why the black head turned red.

And don't forget what the GC wants.

Why are you singling out when Maelys died? The quote specifically mentions "Bittersteel ... and others after him." And you're still running into the problem of assuming that a black dragon = the GC rather than House Blackfyre itself, when there's no good reason to do so.

Nothing makes this theory more complicated that BlAegon, so how do you even try to use Occam's Razor again?

I already explained, but considering you think Bittersteel = wire I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you're confused.

Seriously, Bittersteel = wire. :lmao:

---

As to the question of why Varys would lie to Kevan, an answer can be found in AFfC, Sansa I:

“Thank you.” She felt absurdly proud for puzzling it out, but confused as well. “I’m not, though. Your daughter. Not truly. I mean, I pretend to be Alayne, but you know...”

Littlefinger put a finger to her lips. “I know what I know, and so do you. Some things are best left unsaid, sweetling.”

“Even when we are alone?”

“Especially when we are alone. Elsewise a day will come when a servant walks into a room unannounced, or a guardsman at the door chances to hear something he should not. Do you want more blood on your pretty little hands, my darling?”

[Good Guy Garlan]

If anything, Bloodraven proves that GRRM will include otherwise supplementary material/characters into the main plot despite rarely mentioning them in the main text before doing so. Is it fair that only people who've read D&E or other material would really know or appreciate why it was Brynden? Maybe not. But obviously he would do it because he's done it.

Bloodraven's presence as the Three-Eyed Crow shows that the "Aegon can't be a Blackfyre because they're not mentioned enough in the main series" argument is bunk.

ETA: I just looked it up. Apart from Bran actually interacting with him in the cave, Bloodraven is mentioned in the main series a whopping three times. Two of which are in ADWD, and one is in AFFC. So GRRM made a guy who'se mentioned three times in the story the Three-Eyed Crow, a central part of Bran's story and maybe the overall story. If he did that with Bloodraven, why do so many people think 14 Blackfyre mentions are too few to be significant?

Oh, I'm totally for Aegon as a Blackfyre, for sure, but I do question GRRM's decision to keep bringing things from the complementary stuff to play big roles. I mean, the issue of fairness aside (and really, GRRM can do whatever he wants, being the author and all), I think it might detract from the series, at least for the people who are not familiar with the characters and stuff he brings over. It's gonna look like things out of the blue, like I said, no matter how many times GRRM mentions them in the main series

[Eiko Dragonhorn]

Seriously, Bittersteel = wire. :lmao:

Wow right over your head eh?

Bittersteel would be Long John Heddle if anything, but analogies/metaphors don't actually need 1:1 relations for every noun contained within so it's a pretty foolish point to take issue with.

As usual, completely pointless to try to debate with BlAegon people, they fail to make a single point and brush off every argument with zero reasoning.

Just personal attacks and swearing. /yawn

[The Bear]

I totally agree with this. I wouldn't be surprised if Aegon was fAegon, but I think the Blackfyre thing is just wishful thinking.

George has said he writes for the people who like the story and for the people who like the experience (us). He must be mindful that if he did have Aegon be a Blackfyre pretender that the majority of his readership are going to be incredibly confused by that.

I honestly think the rust-covered black dragon is just a sly wink to those who are in the know, not a secret sign that fAegon is a Blackfyre.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Oh, I'm totally for Aegon as a Blackfyre, for sure, but I do question GRRM's decision to keep bringing things from the complementary stuff to play big roles. I mean, the issue of fairness aside (and really, GRRM can do whatever he wants, being the author and all), I think it might detract from the series, at least for the people who are not familiar with the characters and stuff he brings over. It's gonna look like things out of the blue, like I said, no matter how many times GRRM mentions them in the main series

I can see that, definitely. All I'm saying is that if GRRM is going to make the Three-Eyed Crow be Bloodraven despite only three explicit mentions of him in the main series, there's no reason to think he wouldn't make Aegon a Blackfyre despite "only" mentioning them 14 times (so far).

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

He must be mindful that if he did have Aegon be a Blackfyre pretender that the majority of his readership are going to be incredibly confused by that.

You mean the way he was mindful that most people don't know who the hell Bloodraven is when he made him the Three-Eyed Crow?

[Good Guy Garlan]

I can see that, definitely. All I'm saying is that if GRRM is going to make the Three-Eyed Crow be Bloodraven despite only three explicit mentions of him in the main series, there's no reason to think he wouldn't make Aegon a Blackfyre despite "only" mentioning them 14 times (so far).

Yeah, we're on the same page then

[J. Stargaryen]

Wow right over your head eh?

Bittersteel would be Long John Heddle if anything, but analogies/metaphors don't actually need 1:1 relations for every noun contained within so it's a pretty foolish point to take issue with.

As usual, completely pointless to try to debate with BlAegon people, they fail to make a single point and brush off every argument with zero reasoning.

Just personal attacks and swearing. /yawn

Boo-fucking-hoo. :)