Aegon is Legitimate: It's Obvious, Right? (Long OP)

[Vympel]

I'm going to point out where your argument falls apart:-

Illirio: "Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon. When Maelys the Monstrous died upon the Stepstones, is was the end of the male line of house Blackfyre. And Daeneyrs will give the exiles what Bittersteel and the Blackfyres never could. She will take them home."

A. Black or Red = a Targaryen is a Targaryen is a Targaryen, as far as Illyrio is concerned. They make no distinction. In other words, the support for the Targaryens cited by you above just lost all ability to lend credence to the idea that "Aegon" must be a Red dragon.

B. the male line of House Blackfyre. Not the end of House Blackfyre, but the male line thereof. GRRM does not write such things for no reason. This is an important statement.

Even if we were to operate under the assumption that Aegon is a fake, and is indeed a Blackfyre, what exactly are his motivations or endgame(Dunk and Egg series implies a desire for eventual Blackfyre/Targaryen reconciliation)? House Blackfyre is dead, and has been dead for 4 decades.

No, its not. Read what Illyrio said, carefully. Male line. Not whole House. If you don't think this is important, ask Harry the Heir of the Vale.

What glory can Aegon win them? Moreover, the only thing that separates the black dragon from the red is their name and sigil, they are of the same blood, and their blood was all but vanquished from Westeros by traitors and usurpers. This is not a 100 years past, or even 40. The Blackfyre's and Targaryen's have common cause, and the former knows as well as we do that they cannot stand against Dragons. Taking on Dany would be madness.

I'm not sure what argument you're addressing here, but personally since I think Illyrio and Varys care nothing for the difference between House Blackfyre and House Targaryen, they hope for Aegon to marry his aunt and seal the breach.

And the most damning evidence of all? Well, there's two things. Varys epilogue, and Tyrion's having guessed that young Griff was Aegon.

Kevan: "Aegon? Dead. He's dead".

Varys: "No. He is here. Aegon has been shaped for rule since before he could walk. He has been trained at arms, poetry. A septa has instructed him in the faith since he was old enough to understand them. He has lived with fisherfolk, worked with his hands, swum in rivers and mended nets and learned to wash his own clothes at need. He can fish and cook and bind up a wound, he knows what it is like to be hungry, to be hunted, to be afraid. Aegon knows that kingship is his duty, and that a king must put his people first, and live and rule for them."

No, I'm not convinced he was lying to a dead man. He had no logical reason to do so given the situation, and I'm hardly of the belief that the "Aegon" he's referring to is anybody but the Aegon he carried out his cradle 16 years earlier.(what motivations would he have for deceiving a dead man? Makes no sense)

This supposed damning evidence has been despatched many times before, so I'll just get in before anyone else does. Varys was not alone in that room. That's really all that needs to be said. Moving on.

And...

Tyrion: "The blue hair makes your eyes seem blue... I must admit, you have noble features for a dead boy"

Aegon: "I'm not dead"

Tyrion: "How not? My lord father wrapped your corpse in a crimson cloak and laid you down beside your sister at the foot of the iron throne, his gift to the new king."

Tyrion, one of the most clever and learned(particularly when it comes to Targaryens and Dragons) characters in the series, mistook a Targareyn for a common boy of Lys? And not just any Targaryen, no, he figures this is the dead son of the late Rhaegar. This, while the boys silver/white/blond hair was dyed blue, mind you, and he was disguised. Never mind Jon Connington, whose raised the boy since he was 5(4 year gap), and served both his grandsire and sire. No, he’d haven’t the slightest clue what a Targaryen of royal birth was supposed to look like.

Tyrion can easily be wrong. He is no special authority on telling the difference between a Blackfyre or a Targaryen. Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon.

2. In order to harbor the belief that Aegon is false, you must also believe Quathe's prophecies to be true, and they've already proven faulty.

"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"

Well, for starters, neither Illiro nor Varys were mummers. Illiro was a water dancer and Varys was the king of thieves. Furthermore, being a mummers dragon doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a fake, but can just as easily be interpreted as being the dragon of a mummer. A real dragon, but the pawn of another. In any case...

Varys is known as a mummer, for good reason.

Beware the Kraken, right? That she should, for Victarion may eventually reveal himself an adversary. Though I believe it obvious that he'll join or assist her, rather than war against her. Especially not while the threat of the combined forces of Slavers Bay remain present, with the fleet of old Volantis creeping behind. Moreover, it's obvious it'll be the oars of the Ironborn that sail Dany's armies to Westeros.

Victarion wants to enslave Dany's dragons. She's a tool to be used to him.

Beware the Dark Flame? He was specifically sent out by a council of his superiors to aid Dany in her mission, and thus far, he's proven himself a maestro. The red priests are behind her, as Benerro so clearly voiced. Trust him? perhaps not, but she'd be wise to heed his council.

Beware Tyrion? From what I've gathered from reading these boards, many of you believe Tyrion will be one of the three heads of the dragon(I disagree). If that's the case, why should she fear him? We know Tyrion, sly fellow that he is, and though he can be a little monster at times, do any of us believe he'll conspire against Dany, rather than with her?

The Griffin? The Girffin turned around and went the other way, and besides that fact, is actively dying. There's a legitimate chance he wont live long enough to meet the Dragon queen, let alone spoil whatever her plans are. Never mind the fact that based on his POV, his intentions and motivations seem just, and he's forever been loyal to the Targaryen's.

And here's where it gets ever stickier. People assume that the Sun's Son is a reference towards Quentyn Martell, while the Mummers Dragon is Aegon. Why is that? People forget, but Aegon is also a son of Dorne. His mother, Princess Ellia, was and is Prince Doran's sister, and it'll be Dorne who first raises their banners when he hoist his own above Storms End. They're both children of the sun, no one can dispute that, but only one has proven themselves a false dragon.

ADWD pg. 924

Selmy: "What happened when you tried to take the Dragons? Tell me."

Drinkwater: "Quentyn told the Tattered Prince he could control them. It was in his blood, he said. He had Targaryen blood."

Selmy: "Blood of the Dragon."

Drinkwater: "Yes."

Nowhere in any of this have you proven any of Qaithe's prophecies faulty. You've merely offered (mostly completely unconvincing to me :)) interpretations of them.

3. I’m not quite sure how people can question whether or not the switch were possible? Aegon was a 1 year old hostage whom was seldom seen(confined to a tower for however long Rhaegar was dead), while Varys knowledge and familiarity of the red keep is well documented. In addition, he commands an army of small children whom he has a part in traning, giving him access to a plethora of children of multiple looks, ethnicities, and cultures.

This is the same man that was the dungeons goaler for 15 years without anyone knowing. He helped Tyrion escape from a cell deep within the castle, and before that, was smuggling the dwarf around Kings Landing to his Shae. Of late, he’s been hiding within plain sight, and recently assassinated the King reagent and Maester Pycelle within the keep, after a meeting with his hand and justicar, using a rogue force of children.

In Book 1 of a GOT, Varys snuck Illiro Mopatis within the red keep in the hall amongst the dragon skulls. Yet, no one noticed this, nor believed Arya when she told them. Illirio Mopatis, a foreign fat man of extravagant dress and extreme girth, and people question if he could switch out a babe without notice? Hell, Petyr Bealish snuck out and smuggled away Sansa from Kings Landing during the kings wedding, amidst thousands of guest, and she’s beautiful, tall, and red headed. Ramsay and Roose Bolton have half the north convinced that a girl 3 years her senior, and that looks little like a Stark, was in fact Ned Starks youngest daughter. Gilly tricked everyone on the wall by taking Mance’s baby while leaving her own, a fact Sam failed to realize until months later. And the discovery wasn’t made because of how the baby looked, but because Gilly persisted with her grief.

To pretend as if a switch of an infant baby were impossible and or even improbable given what we’ve seen in this series makes little sense. Who was there to deny the child with the crushed face(It would be highlly difficult for the 8ft monster known as the mountain, whose known for his brutality and other-wordly strength, to crush an infants face, right?) Tywin, Ned, or Robert? Please. If anything, Varys has repeatedly shown himself a master of the shadows, and any doubt to whether or not he could sneak about the red keep, in this case, to switch out a babe, should be answered and dismissed by his already proven prowess. And please spare me the, “Did she now care about Rhaenys?”, or “Ellia wouldn’t trust Varys” arguments. All heirs are kept apart during sacks, and Rhaenys specifically fled to the room of her father in an obvious attempt to seek shelter. Moreover, no woman can sit the iron throne, so the threat of Rhaenys being killed was less than that of Aegon. Ellia had no choice but to trust Varys, or concede to the switch. For one, I don’t doubt this ploy was conceived by Rheagar should he die(his life revolved around the Ptwp), and once he had, it was either trust Varys or watch her son perish.

4. Prior to reaching the room of the Undying Ones, Danny traveled down a hall and looked behind doors that opened up to visions of things past and soon to come. They weren’t cryptic nor where they presented as riddles, they were simply visions. People typically speak of the vision of the mummers dragon when talking of the House of Undying, but one vision, the 5th, is oft ignored when it comes to discussions of whether or not Aegon is truly Rhaegar's son. But I believe it's telling, and in my opinion, supports Aegon's legitimacy.

"Viserys, was her first thought the next time she paused, but a second glance told her otherwise. The man had her brother's hair, but he was taller, and his eyes were a dark indigo rather than lilac. "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." He went to the window seat, picked up a harp, and ran his fingers lightly over its silvery strings. Sweet sadness filled the room as man and wife and babe faded like the morning mist, only the music lingering behind to speed her on her way."

Aegon is the harp to Danny and Jon's song of ice and fire. The Prince who was Promised, and Azor Azhai aren't the same, but separate entities that will join to become the three heads of the Dragon. And Rhaegar knew.

Rhaegar's not infallible. If he was, he wouldn't have had his chest caved in by Robert's warhammer.

Now then - is Qaithe infallible? No, of course not. But there's far more reason to believe Aegon is a Blackfyre fraud who is going to get eaten by a dragon than there is to believe otherwise.

[Lord Varys]

The weird thing with the Blackfyre theory is that Varys and Illyrio would have had a Blackfyre child (Illyrio's son by Serra) ready and in attendance when the real Aegon died in a why which would enable them to make their Aegon into Aegon Targaryen. And that's too much of stretch in my opinion.

It would not be impossible, but it feels fishy and clumsy.

Varys does not care about dynasties and stuff. He wants a king who can create and uphold a lasting peace in Westeros. There would be potential in the Blackfyre story, I admit that, for example:

1. What will Aegon and Connington do if they ever find out? Will Aegon step down?

2. What's Illyrio's endgame? Would he want to tell his son the truth to become his father again? What would Varys do to prevent that?

But the series as a whole would not profit all that much from another whole layer of intrigue. Especially since the Blackfyre and Targaryen are pretty much the same since Robert won his rebellion.

And the fact that the real Aegon was supposed to be Azor Ahai/the prince that was promised would make him a much better 'false savior' if he was truly a Targaryen (and the rightful King of Westeros) but not the promised prince.

It's also not that unlikely that the friendship between Varys and Illyrio actually united the Blackfyre and Targaryen family tree. Illyrio could very well be a Blackfyre through the female line (his sway over the Golden Company is somewhat strange), but Varys most certainly is not his brother, nor is Serra his sister. It would be quite funny if a Blackfyre raised the Targaryen crown prince as his son for four years and really grow fond of that child.

The Mummer's Dragon thing actually seems to refer to Varys, who was a mummer as a child, but it does not prove that Aegon is not who he believes he is (nor does the original prophecy in the House of the Undying, where the cloth dragon appears). Aegon most likely is not who Rhaegar believed he was destined to become, but he might still be Dany's nephew.

[Bravely Done]

Varys and Illyrio have undoubtedly protected, sheltered and educated Aegon from a young age. But as it is his identity in question that is proof only that they are invested in their pawn in the game, not that they are supportive of Targaryens.

They've sheltered and protected all remaining Targaryens. Aegon, Danny, and Viserys; proving very much that they've supported and are supportive of the Targaryen cause.

Also, it should be noted that Illirio only housed Aegon for 4 years. The rest of the boys youth was taken care of by Griff.

The undisputed Targaryens spent years without a sponsor in the Free Cities; that's why Viserys was called the beggar king. Illyrio gave them only a year of support before Dany's marriage when he is shown to have the resources to have been providing for them all along. The support he did give them is also consistent with him using them as a pawn; - the marriage to Drogo could have been intended to get the Dothraki to invade Westeros and cause disruption to Robert's (at that point) stable reign - allowing Aegon to appear later and in a better light by contrast.

You're forgetting about the house with the red door. They had a sponsor, whom they lived with for years in Bravos, but Ser Willem died. They didn't find Illirio until much after, but from the time they've found him until now, he's done nothing but assist them. All of them.

The boy on the boat is called Aegon and he has had a 'kingly' education. That is not in dispute. That is all Varys says, he doesn't say anything to make the case that this Aegon is the original Aegon.

You're stretching, at best. What "Aegon" would he be reffering to? Which "Aegon" was referenced throuout the book? How man "Aegon's" are running around Westeros that can legitimately sell that they're a Targaryen? I don't know of too many running around.

Tyrion recognises that this is a boy being prepared for a claim to a throne.

No, Tyrion recognizes that he's a Targaryen, even through his disguise. He specifically notes traits that lead him to believe as much, such as his eyes. And he noted those the first time he saw him.

He gets that from; i/ Illyrio and Varys's interest in who is on the Iron Throne ii

Outside of Vary's epologue, neither he nor and Illyrio have never expressed whom it is they want sitting the iron throne.

If Aegon is a fake the plot depends on him having enough of the Targaryen / Valyrian look. That is easily found on Essos

Based on? Lys is the only city in the east where the blood of the freehold remains distinct, and they're separated from Targareyns through their eyes. Moreover, "common" is the least of my thoughts whenever a Targaryen is described. Danereys is a world reknowned beauty, Rheagar received similar praise from women, and Aegon is desribed by Tyrion as someone who could seduce half the maids in Westeros, etc.

Lancel has the Lannister "look", but he's no Jamie.

so whether real or fake Aegon does look something like a Targaryen. It is nearly 20 years since Jon C last saw a grown Targaryen and there are no photographs so Aegon does not have to have an exact resemblance to pass (and children don't exactly resemble their parents in any case).

Huh? Jon Connington has been with Aegon since he was 5, 4 years after the Targareyns fell.

Um, why must I believe in Quathe's prophecies?

What other reason would you have to suspect him being false?

[Vympel]

The weird thing with the Blackfyre theory is that Varys and Illyrio would have had a Blackfyre child (Illyrio's son by Serra) ready and in attendance when the real Aegon died in a why which would enable them to make their Aegon into Aegon Targaryen. And that's too much of stretch in my opinion.

It would not be impossible, but it feels fishy and clumsy.

Varys does not care about dynasties and stuff. He wants a king who can create and uphold a lasting peace in Westeros. There would be potential in the Blackfyre story, I admit that, for example:

1. What will Aegon and Connington do if they ever find out? Will Aegon step down?

2. What's Illyrio's endgame? Would he want to tell his son the truth to become his father again? What would Varys do to prevent that?

But the series as a whole would not profit all that much from another whole layer of intrigue. Especially since the Blackfyre and Targaryen are pretty much the same since Robert won his rebellion.

And the fact that the real Aegon was supposed to be Azor Ahai/the prince that was promised would make him a much better 'false savior' if he was truly a Targaryen (and the rightful King of Westeros) but not the promised prince.

It's also not that unlikely that the friendship between Varys and Illyrio actually united the Blackfyre and Targaryen family tree. Illyrio could very well be a Blackfyre through the female line (his sway over the Golden Company is somewhat strange), but Varys most certainly is not his brother, nor is Serra his sister. It would be quite funny if a Blackfyre raised the Targaryen crown prince as his son for four years and really grow fond of that child.

The Mummer's Dragon thing actually seems to refer to Varys, who was a mummer as a child, but it does not prove that Aegon is not who he believes he is (nor does the original prophecy in the House of the Undying, where the cloth dragon appears). Aegon most likely is not who Rhaegar believed he was destined to become, but he might still be Dany's nephew.

I would be careful about interpreting Mummer's Dragon that way. Remember:-

A cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd

...

A mummer’s dragon, you said. What is a mummer’s dragon, pray?”

“A cloth dragon on poles,” Dany explained. “Mummers use them in their follies, to give the

heroes something to fight.”

Dany saw a cloth dragon. She wasn't just told mummer's dragon.

[Quentyn the Blazed]

That's not true at all, all the evidence that shows he is a Blackfyre is completely unrelated to Quaithe.

Is it? How about enlightening us with this evidence?

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to write out a long argument. I don't agree with any of it, but I applaud the effort you put into it.

Apologies that I don't have time for a full response but a few things that jumped out at me immediately:

-You mention Varys warning Jorah of the assassination attempt on Dany. Of course, Varys is the one who arranges the assassination attempt on Dany. In fact, we don't know for sure that Varys 'warned' Jorah or told him to stop it. We can only assume Jorah was told an assassination was coming and Jorah did the rest on his own. But Varys had no logical reason to inform the Small Council of Dany's pregnancy or arrange an assassination if he was just a Targaryen loyalist.

-Aegon being Illyrio's son is far from the most farfetched theory on this board. Have you seen Nedbert? Tyrion mentions Illyrio having children's clothing in his possession and Illyrio speaks awfully fondly of Aegon- he even gets visibly upset when he is told he won't be able to see him before he heads down the Rhoyne. Seems like a deep attachment.

-You mention that the GC was heading to support Dany, and had broken a contract, before finding out about Aegon. This is not true. When Jon Connington arrives and "informs" the GC of "who" "Aegon" "is" (fun with scare quotes!), he realizes that they already knew what he was about to tell them. Meaning JC was the one out-of-the-loop and the GC knew full-well exactly for whom they were breaking their contract.

-You mention that Tyion figures out who Aegon is supposed to be, but he also indicates doubt. When Aegon throws his cyvasse tantrum, Tyrion thinks- paraphrase- 'Perhaps he is a real Targaryen'

[7OldDrownedRedGodsofLight]

Ever since R+L=J, people have been trying to make square pegs fit into round holes. They seem to discount overwhelming evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, and decide that everything is a ruse through pure speculation, then try and pass it off as fact. Aegon being fake is one of the very speculative theories that has gained traction, and is almost now considered fact by most on this board. I am glad you posted all this evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, not some piece mealed theory that is clunky and doesn't really have but pure speculation as the main points of evidence.

Bravo, Bravely Done, Bravo :cheers:

[Vympel]

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to write out a long argument. I don't agree with any of it, but I applaud the effort you put into it.

Apologies that I don't have time for a full response but a few things that jumped out at me immediately:

-You mention Varys warning Jorah of the assassination attempt on Dany. Of course, Varys is the one who arrange the assassination attempt on Dany. In fact, we don't know for sure that Varys 'warned' Jorah or told him to stop it. We can only assume Jorah was told an assassination was coming and Jorah did the rest on his own. But Varys had no logical reason to inform the Small Council of Dany's pregnancy or arrange an assassination if he was just a Targaryen loyalist.

-Illyrio beings Aegon's son is far from the most farfetched theories on this board. Have you seen Nedbert? Tyrion mentions Illyrio having children's clothing in his position and Illyrio speaks awfully fondly of Aegon- he even gets visibly upset when he is told he won't be able to see him before he heads down the Rhoyne. Seems like a deep attachment.

-You mention that the GC was heading to support Dany, and had broken a contract, before finding out about Aegon. This is not true. When Jon Connington arrives and "informs" the GC of "who" "Aegon" "is" (fun with scare quotes!), he realizes that they already knew what he was about to tell them. Meaning JC was the one out-of-the-loop and the GC new full-well exactly for whom they were breaking their contract.

-You mention that Tyion figures out who Aegon is supposed to be, but he also indicates doubt. When Aegon throws his cyvasse tantrum, Tyrion thinks- paraphrase- 'Perhaps he is a real Targaryen'

This. There's something else I'd like to mention. Does anyone really think, given how all the references to Bloodraven in the Dunk and Egg stories paid off to the Bloodraven reveal in ADWD - that all the talk of the Blackfyre pretenders, and Daemon Blackfyre (the Second) coming over to Westeros without the sword from which his house got its name (and the humiliating results) - people really think this is not going to be revisited in ASoIaF? If Aegon doesn't lift up Blackfyre over his head to prove he's worthy of Bittersteel's long dead ambitions, I'll eat my hat.

[Malgarroth]

Ever since R+L=J, people have been trying to make square pegs fit into round holes. They seem to discount overwhelming evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, and decide that everything is a ruse through pure speculation, then try and pass it off as fact. Aegon being fake is one of the very speculative theories that has gained traction, and is almost now considered fact by most on this board. I am glad you posted all this evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, not some piece mealed theory that is clunky and doesn't really have but pure speculation as the main points of evidence.

Bravo, Bravely Done, Bravo :cheers:

Ever since R+L=J, people have been trying to make square pegs fit into round holes. They seem to discount overwhelming evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, and decide that everything is a ruse through pure speculation, then try and pass it off as fact. Aegon being fake is one of the very speculative theories that has gained traction, and is almost now considered fact by most on this board. I am glad you posted all this evidence in favor of what is actually in the text, not some piece mealed theory that is clunky and doesn't really have but pure speculation as the main points of evidence.

Bravo, Bravely Done, Bravo :cheers:

:bowdown: :agree:

[Bravely Done]

A. Black or Red = a Targaryen is a Targaryen is a Targaryen, as far as Illyrio is concerned. They make no distinction. In other words, the support for the Targaryens cited by you above just lost all ability to lend credence to the idea that "Aegon" must be a Red dragon.

What you just posted doesn't make sense in the context of the quote. Tyrion plainly asked, why it is the GC would fight for Danny when their legacy consist of them fighting against Targareyns. That's when Illyrio responded with, "A Dragon is a dragon, and Danny will take them home".

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

B. the male line of House Blackfyre. Not the end of House Blackfyre, but the male line thereof. GRRM does not write such things for no reason. This is an important statement.

Yes, and his mother is the slave girl whom was the catalyst for Illyrio being barred from the Palace? Illyrio's going to give his son to Griff, at 5, for the hell of it?

No, its not. Read what Illyrio said, carefully. Male line. Not whole House. If you don't think this is important, ask Harry the Heir of the Vale.

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. In fact, no similarities exist. None.

I'm not sure what argument you're addressing here, but personally since I think Illyrio and Varys care nothing for the difference between House Blackfyre and House Targaryen, they hope for Aegon to marry his aunt and seal the breach.

What exactly would be the point of him being a Blackfyre then?

This supposed damning evidence has been despatched many times before, so I'll just get in before anyone else does. Varys was not alone in that room. That's really all that needs to be said. Moving on.

What motivation would Varys have to lie before his birds, who've kept his secrets and enabled him to flourish through 4 kings, 5 books, and 15+ years?

Tyrion can easily be wrong. He is no special authority on telling the difference between a Blackfyre or a Targaryen. Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon.

I'd dare say nobody can tell the difference between a Blackfyre and a Targaryen, since they're the same in all but name.

Varys is known as a mummer, for good reason.

No, he isn't. He was the master of theivs, and now he's the master of whispers.

Victarion wants to enslave Dany's dragons. She's a tool to be used to him.

I don't recall Victarion ever claiming he wanted to enslave Danny's dragons. You'll have to point that out in the text.

Rhaegar's not infallible. If he was, he wouldn't have had his chest caved in by Robert's warhammer.

What does that have to do with three heads of the dragons?

Now then - is Qaithe infallible? No, of course not. But there's far more reason to believe Aegon is a Blackfyre fraud who is going to get eaten by a dragon than there is to believe otherwise.

Actually, there's no reason to believe that. I'm curious as to why it's even a legitimate theory?

[Bravely Done]

This. There's something else I'd like to mention. Does anyone really think, given how all the references to Bloodraven in the Dunk and Egg stories paid off to the Bloodraven reveal in ADWD - that all the talk of the Blackfyre pretenders, and Daemon Blackfyre (the Second) coming over to Westeros without the sword from which his house got its name (and the humiliating results) - people really think this is not going to be revisited in ASoIaF? If Aegon doesn't lift up Blackfyre over his head to prove he's worthy of Bittersteel's long dead ambitions, I'll eat my hat.

So how do you explain Aegon running East with the Golden Company to ask for Danny's hand in marriage? Sounds like the last thing a Blackfyre would do, marry a Targaryen with more power. It was only after Tyrion counciled him otherwise that he turned West to conquer.

[Housefires]

Aegon doesn't know he's fake.

[Lord Varys]

We know that Varys did not what Dany's death. Jorah states as much in ASoS. In a letter to Jorah he wrote him that he wanted her watched, not killed. Varys arranged an attempt on Dany he know would fail. It was means to convince Drogo to invade Westeros. And it worked flawlessly.

[PatrickStormborn]

No, Aegon is not legitimate.

I'll focus on your argument that Varys and Illyrio are secret Targaryen loyalists. Firstly, Varys worked as hard as possible to increase the paranoia of Aerys. Why would he do that if he wanted the Targaryen dynasty to remain stable? Why would he inform Aerys that Rhaegar was plotting to take his throne? Surely, if he supported the Targaryens, he'd want Rhaegar on the throne, not Aerys?

In addition, look at the treatment that Viserys and Dany receive. They are left to wander the Free Cities in exile with no help whatsoever for thirteen years. Illyrio then arranges for Dany to be sold to Khal Drogo, although in ADWD he mentions that he did not expect her to survive. If he was a Targaryen loyalist, why would he sell her to Drogo and increase the chances of her death? He also comments to Tyrion in ADWD that Viserys raping Dany would "undo years of planning". If they had been planning to wed Dany to Drogo for "years", why wait so long to take them in? And why not reveal Aegon straight away?

Illyrio and Varys do not support the Targaryens. They support Aegon. Daenerys was completely dispensible to their plans until she until she hatched her dragons and tore Slaver's Bay apart.

So why do they support Aegon if they were so keen to destroy the Targaryen dynasty in the first place? There are only a few logical answers:

1. They are Blackfyre loyalists, and Aegon is a Blackfyre
   
2. Aegon is Illyrio's son
   
3. Both of the above
   
4. They want their own pawn on the throne
   

[Quentyn the Blazed]

Two things:

1. Most people seem to get caught up in the "slayer of lies" part of the HotU combined with the cloth dragon Dany sees. Sure, this could mean she comes in and slays the lie of Aegon being Aegon. But a cloth dragon hung on poles is not a sigil. It doesn't point to Aegon being cheered, that would be a three headed dragon banner. The cloth dragon to me refers to the crowd of people celebrating the return of dragons. Dany has returned to Westeros and they are cheering her on with a cloth dragon in support.

Could be she slays the lie of Targaryens being shitty (esp. if people start calling Aegon a fool, or mummer's dragon, if you will), could be she slays the lie of her own dragons being a good thing. But I think, like the crowd calling her mother, this will be a literal scene when Dany lands on Westeros.

Dany is the one who calls it a mummer's dragon. It is not associated with Quiathe's mummer's dragon (I agree this could be Quentyn, or I have posted many times that Aegon is just an idiot, and people will grow to call him a fool)

2. The GC commander told everyone that Aegon was alive, but regardless of who he really is they HAD to have been told hes the real Aegon. JC told the previous commander of GC about Aegon, and he believes Aegon was truly Aegon, so the previous GC commander was in on the plan to put Rhaegars son back on the throne.

[Frey Pie]

No, Aegon is not legitimate.

I'll focus on your argument that Varys and Illyrio are secret Targaryen loyalists. Firstly, Varys worked as hard as possible to increase the paranoia of Aerys. Why would he do that if he wanted the Targaryen dynasty to remain stable? Why would he inform Aerys that Rhaegar was plotting to take his throne? Surely, if he supported the Targaryens, he'd want Rhaegar on the throne, not Aerys?

Then why did he beg Aerys not to open the gates to Tywin? Surely if he wanted Aerys gone he would have backed up the Grandmaester

Im not saying your wrong but it doesnt all add up neatly

[HouseLark]

There are clearly ways by which Aegon could be legitimate. The switch isn't so hard to believe given everything we know about Varys, the layout and secret tunnels of the Red Keep, and the confusion that occurs during the sacking of a city.

The reason that I don't think he is legitimate is simply that it would be poor storytelling. Introducing a new and game changing character at this stage, five books into the series, undermines the investment GRRM made in writing his other characters and our investment in them as readers. It also undermines one of the most powerful historical events of the series, the killing of the baby prince which firmly established the monstrousness of Gregor Clegane and Tywin Lannister. I guess some will say "well a baby still died" but lots of babies die in the series, none have the same impact on the reader as the death of baby Aegon.

This new Targaryen is also close to a deus ex machina. There have been no hints to his survival in previous novels, he's just come from nowhere and the readers are expected to buy into him? I don't think GRRM would play so fast and loose with his story, it is rather, something that you would find in fan fic. However, what he most certainly has seeded throughout the series is that a "false dragon" would represent a threat to Dany's ambitions. A false Aegon fits with that neatly and represents better storytelling.

And don't take "mummer's dragon literally"; I don't think the prophecy refers to a dragon that belongs to mummers, it means a person of no distinction dressed up as a Targaryen, someone playing a part much as a mummer would.

Now why would Varys want to place a false Targaryen on the throne? Who knows his real motivations? My guess is that he is sick of the destruction that the battle between the great houses wreaks on the folk of Westeros. He's probably one of the few that genuinely cares about what happens to the small folk. I believe that he is seeking to place a "good king" on the throne, someone who will rule on behalf of the people rather than the houses, as evidenced by his speech to Kevan. I also think that he needs to go with the farce of pretending this boy is a Targaryen because winning the throne requires support from the great houses and banners; once on the throne he can theoretically begin to rule on behalf of the small folk. It is telling that Varys says that Aegon has been "shaped to rule" rather than "born to rule" - Varys knows as we do now that the notion of blood bequeathing ability is ridiculous but to the rest of Westeros this assumption still holds true. Varys knows that you can make a good ruler, but you can't birth one.

In short, when Varys says he serves the realm I believe him; he just doesn't serve the great houses.

[Vympel]

What you just posted doesn't make sense in the context of the quote. Tyrion plainly asked, why it is the GC would fight for Danny when their legacy consist of them fighting against Targareyns. That's when Illyrio responded with, "A Dragon is a dragon, and Danny will take them home".

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

Tyrion's question doesn't matter. Illyrio's answer does. Its what he thinks about the difference that's important - there isn't one as far as he's concerned. Therefore, all this talk about how "Varys and Illyrio supported the Targaryens" is irrelevant to the question of whether Aegon is a Targaryen or a Blackfyre. Because there's no difference.

Furthermore, assuming Aegon is a fake - which he obviously is - the Golden Company doesn't support Aegon because he's a Targaryen, they support him because he's a Blackfyre - like they've always done. And which, by the way, is likely the only reason why they'd ever break a contract. To put a Blackfyre in Westeros. And we're supposed to ignore all of this because of Illyrio's trite response to Tyrion? I don't think so.

Yes, and his mother is the slave girl whom was the catalyst for Illyrio being barred from the Palace? Illyrio's going to give his son to Griff, at 5, for the hell of it?

Huh? This is just so much gobbledygook to me.

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. In fact, no similarities exist. None.

Yes, they do. Its really simple:- in the Vale, if Sweet Robin were to die, then he has no heirs. In the male line of House Arryn. He does have heirs in the female line. That being Harry the Heir. Thus, when Illyrio states that House Blackfyre is extinct in the male line, then that establishes two things:-

1. House Blackfyre is not, in fact, extinct.

2. Heirs can still be kicking around - in he female line.

As the situation in the Vale demonstrates. Moving on.

What exactly would be the point of him being a Blackfyre then?

I don't know, I'm not the author. To make Dany's life difficult.

What motivation would Varys have to lie before his birds, who've kept his secrets and enabled him to flourish through 4 kings, 5 books, and 15+ years?

Because his birds might get caught and tortured.

EDIT:- And little birds don't stay little for 15 years. :)

I'd dare say nobody can tell the difference between a Blackfyre and a Targaryen, since they're the same in all but name.

Exactly.

No, he isn't. He was the master of theivs, and now he's the master of whispers.

So he was always the master of thieves was he? :)

I don't recall Victarion ever claiming he wanted to enslave Danny's dragons. You'll have to point that out in the text.

He's got a horn for that purpose, it doesn't need to be claimed.

What does that have to do with three heads of the dragons?

That he's a fallible human being and his pronouncements carry no special weight.

Actually, there's no reason to believe that. I'm curious as to why it's even a legitimate theory?

Known facts of the Golden Company referred to above, hints dropped by Illyrio referred to above, Dany's visions and heard prophecies in the House of the Undying about the mummer's dragon. Its a completely legitimate theory amply backed up by the text.

[7OldDrownedRedGodsofLight]

No, Aegon is not legitimate.

I'll focus on your argument that Varys and Illyrio are secret Targaryen loyalists. Firstly, Varys worked as hard as possible to increase the paranoia of Aerys. Why would he do that if he wanted the Targaryen dynasty to remain stable? Why would he inform Aerys that Rhaegar was plotting to take his throne? Surely, if he supported the Targaryens, he'd want Rhaegar on the throne, not Aerys?

In addition, look at the treatment that Viserys and Dany receive. They are left to wander the Free Cities in exile with no help whatsoever for thirteen years. Illyrio then arranges for Dany to be sold to Khal Drogo, although in ADWD he mentions that he did not expect her to survive. If he was a Targaryen loyalist, why would he sell her to Drogo and increase the chances of her death? He also comments to Tyrion in ADWD that Viserys raping Dany would "undo years of planning". If they had been planning to wed Dany to Drogo for "years", why wait so long to take them in? And why not reveal Aegon straight away?

Illyrio and Varys do not support the Targaryens. They support Aegon. Daenerys was completely dispensible to their plans until she until she hatched her dragons and tore Slaver's Bay apart.

So why do they support Aegon if they were so keen to destroy the Targaryen dynasty in the first place? There are only a few logical answers:

1. They are Blackfyre loyalists, and Aegon is a Blackfyre
   
2. Aegon is Illyrio's son
   
3. Both of the above
   
4. They want their own pawn on the throne
   

so what you are saying is that Varys SHOULDN'T have wanted Aerys to remain king, because he was mad, and Rhaegar would have been a better king. Yet he would wan't Viserys, who is also mad, or Dany, a woman, instead of Aegon, who has been raised to rule as a prudent, merciful, and just ruler?

[Vympel]

Aegon doesn't know he's fake.

Correct.