Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bravely Done

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

Recommended Posts

Despite the possible problems with the theory, that I've pointed out, there is certainly evidence for it, which I've also pointed out. That's one of the things with George. It is so difficult to trust what is said outright that problems with a theory won't necessarily invalidate it. At this point I could go either way with it.

I agree. Whilst there's legitimate room for disagreement about where the strength of the evidence lies, the argument that Aegon is real and that his being fake is a: not legiitmate and b: has no evidence are statements so completely preposterous that it beggars belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but they provided evidence to Aegon being real.

No one said there wasn't evidence that he was real. The argument is the strength of the evidence.

Sounds like you just put in an argument for Aegon being real...congrats, welcome to the winning team! Aegon should marry his AUNT.

Very very distant aunt, obviously, since they're still related by my interpretation. :)

And if they dont give a shit about the type of targaryen, why not take the real aegon Varys snuck out of the red keep and make him king?

Because the Golden Company fighting for Targaryens is simply not credible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This. Exactly this. There's no way we can trust Varys when he lied about Aegon being hunted and going hungry because we know it's not true. If no one knew "Aegon" existed, he couldn't have been hunted. And the kid sure as hell didn't know what it was like to be hungry. He was sponsored by Illyrio, one of the richest men in the series. If Illyrio and/or Varys were actually Targ supporters, they would have found a way to also sponsor Dany and Viserys instead of allowing them to wonder around the Free Cities with no support and receiving no education. After all, if Aegon is actually a Targaryen, there'd be a need to make sure his heirs were properly prepared to take the throne in case he fell over dead from greyscale or red spots or something.

No one knew he existed because he spent his life in hiding. Spend the first fifteen years of your life lying about your identity and hiding your true facial features in case someone recognizes you. Then tell me if you feel hunted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mummer's dragon" = fake dragon, just as "mummer's tears" = fake tears. Dany calls the vision in the House of the Undying a "mummer's dragon", and she has to slay the lie of this vision.

Maybe Tywin Lannister taking over King's Landing just didn't fit Varys' endgame. Or maybe he truly thought that Tywin was coming to help.

I still believe the mummers dragon is Aurane Waters. Fake dragon because he looks like one but is not and has no loyalty or mettle to him. I dont know about the slaying of lies

Possibly. But Lord Varys doesnt seem to be one to not know important info like this. The only reason other then him being a Targ loyalist i can see is that he was afraid Tywin would claim the throne himself. Then again i dont know why he would fear this as he can easily dispose of Tywin as was shown with Tyrion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one said there wasn't evidence that he was real. The argument is the strength of the evidence.

Very very distant aunt, obviously, since they're still related by my interpretation. :)

Because the Golden Company fighting for Targaryens is simply not credible.

Again, how did the GC get the idea Aegon is a blackfyre? JC is the one who told the former commander, and he supported JCs plan. When the fuck would they start believing hes a blackfyre, and why? JC also agrees with all of Illyrio's plans, so its tough to make Illyrio's plan point to Aegon being a blackfyre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you have speculation that he is a fake and everyone should now believe that?

No, I didn't say that. I was responding to the poster who said "Everyone here who supports Aegon being real backed it up with some kind of evidence. Faegon supporters on the other hand... " This implies that the theorists who support Aegon being real are supplying hard evidence of this, and those who don't aren't supplying any.

Aegon's being real is predicated on the idea that we can take Illyrio and Vary's words as evidence. Others have been pointing out that we have very good reason to be suspicious of what Varys and Illyrio say, we've provided evidence of this, and it stands to reason that Varys and Illyrio's truthfulness provides a flimsy base around which to frame the notion that Aegon is real.

Secondly, there are many incorrect facts in the OP and other posts that negate the veracity of those points being used as evidence. For example, the GC broke their contract before Connington got to them, so one cannot say that they were previously engaged in pro-Targ ends. It's a suspicious point.

Third, a bunch of "evidence" claimed by the Aegon is real side of this appeals to the notion that we must categorically ignore prophesy in all this (yet, simultaneously tries to "prove" Aegon is real based the HotU vision, and on the very incorrect belief that AAR and the PtwP are two separate things). So there's a lot of issues here that lead me to question what this particular poster's opinion that the "Aegon is real advocates use evidence" is counting as evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one knew he existed because he spent his life in hiding. Spend the first fifteen years of your life lying about your identity and hiding your true facial features in case someone recognizes you. Then tell me if you feel hunted

If he was in hiding and no one knew he existed then he couldn't have been hunted! One can hide their identity (which is stupid anyway considering "targ" features aren't all that uncommon outside of Westeros) and still not feel hunted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I didn't say that. I was responding to the poster who said "Everyone here who supports Aegon being real backed it up with some kind of evidence. Faegon supporters on the other hand... " This implies that the theorists who support Aegon being real are supplying hard evidence of this, and those who don't aren't supplying any.

Aegon's being real is predicated on the idea that we can take Illyrio and Vary's words as evidence. Others have been pointing out that we have very good reason to be suspicious of what Varys and Illyrio say, we've provided evidence of this, and it stands to reason that Varys and Illyrio's truthfulness provides a flimsy base around which to frame the notion that Aegon is real.

Secondly, there are many incorrect facts in the OP and other posts that negate the veracity of those points being used as evidence. For example, the GC broke their contract before Connington got to them, so one cannot say that they were previously engaged in pro-Targ ends. It's a suspicious point.

Third, a bunch of "evidence" claimed by the Aegon is real side of this appeals to the notion that we must categorically ignore prophesy in all this (yet, simultaneously tries to "prove" Aegon is real based the HotU vision, and on the very incorrect belief that AAR and the PtwP are two separate things). So there's a lot of issues here that lead me to question what this particular poster's opinion that the "Aegon is real" advocates use evidence is counting as evidence.

AGAIN, JC TOLD the former commander about Aegon, and the commander supported JC. sounds pro-Targ to me.

And the pophecies are open for interpretation. I could argue they mean patchpace is a dragon since hes a mummer and dany will slay the lie of him being an idiot. it means whatever you want it to mean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was in hiding and no one knew he existed then he couldn't have been hunted! One can hide their identity (which is stupid anyway considering "targ" features aren't all that uncommon outside of Westeros) and still not feel hunted.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure Pedobear was screwing a Dany look alike in ADWD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Arya" left from King's Landing, where the real Arya was for a time, and Jeyne Poole ("Arya") for that matter. Nobody in the book questioned if Jeyne was the real Arya. On the other hand baby Aegon was kept hidden from the time of Rhaegar's death, to the time of his own death/ switch.

Aegon didn't need to be unrecognizable for Varys' plan to work, but it did help.

Aegon DID need to be unrecognisable. Otherwise the lords/workers in the Red Keep (who would know Aegon) would have been able to identify the baby presented before them as being fake. Aegon was around one year old at this time, which is old enough to be able to differentiate between two babies of a similar age. Varys' whole scheme works on the premise that none of the lords could identify the baby that was laid before Robert as being fake.

The only reason no one questions "Arya" is because they need her for their plans, or because they have not seen Arya since she was 8/9. In ADWD it has been at least three years since most Northern lords had seen her. And I expect that most of them realise Jeyne is not Arya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

soooo, what your saying is Varys and Illirio lie to everyone but the Gold Company?

No, they lie to who they have the opportunity to lie to. Its possible that they've lied to the Golden Company that Aegon is a Blackfyre and not a Targaryen, though. I just don't find it especially convincing. See, this is the sort of way you couch your argument if you're reasonable, and not so in love with your own position that you immediately denounce all other viewpoints as inherently illegitimate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AGAIN, JC TOLD the former commander about Aegon, and the commander supported JC. sounds pro-Targ to me.

And the pophecies are open for interpretation. I could argue they mean patchpace is a dragon since hes a mummer and dany will slay the lie of him being an idiot. it means whatever you want it to mean

Just for argument's sake here, is it possible, just possible, that JC is a pawn in all this? That Illyrio/ Varys contacted the GC prior to JC's arrival, so that the GC knew that this was a Blackfyre cause, and agreed to back Aegon to JC under disguised premises?

Also, the books never set up an imperative where mummer=dragon, or that Dany slays idiots (she slays "lies"), so your devil's advocate is also pretty flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aegon DID need to be unrecognisable. Otherwise the lords/workers in the Red Keep (who would know Aegon) would have been able to identify the baby presented before them as being fake. Aegon was around one year old at this time, which is old enough to be able to differentiate between two babies of a similar age. Varys' whole scheme works on the premise that none of the lords could identify the baby that was laid before Robert as being fake.

The only reason no one questions "Arya" is because they need her for their plans, or because they have not seen Arya since she was 8/9. In ADWD it has been at least three years since most Northern lords had seen her. And I expect that most of them realise Jeyne is not Arya.

surely you don't believe that a baby with similar features couldn't be passed of as another? Other than the Kingsguard (who undoubtedly did not spend their days studying baby Aegon's features) who in the throne room had ever even seen baby Aegon?

edit for clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll focus on your argument that Varys and Illyrio are secret Targaryen loyalists.

To the readers, it's no longer a secret. Never has been. Since book one Illyrio and Varys have aided Viserys, Dany, and Aegon. They've given them armies, protected their identities, given them ships and gifts, given them dragon eggs, sent them aid(Selmy, Griff, Tyrion), guided them through the East so that they may one day return to Westeros

Firstly, Varys worked as hard as possible to increase the paranoia of Aerys.

Source? My material says Aeyrs madness was planted in Duskendale, and that Varys "manipulations" began and ended at warning Ayers that Rhaegar was conspiring againt him. Which, according to Jamie's POV arch in AFFC, was true.

Also, how do you explain Varys cautioning Aeyrs against opening his gates to Tywin and the Lannisters?

Why would he inform Aerys that Rhaegar was plotting to take his throne?

Because he was.

Surely, if he supported the Targaryens, he'd want Rhaegar on the throne, not Aerys?

Whose to say Rhaegar would make a good king?

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.

False. They lived with Ser Willem, at the house with the red door, in Pentos, until Willem's death. They were then chased away by Willems servants, which began Viserys traveling around the free cities in search of an army. Something that stopped when he found Illyrio.

Illyrio then arranges for Dany to be sold to Khal Drogo, although in ADWD he mentions that he did not expect her to survive.

Illyrio didn't sell Danny to Drogo.

ADWD pg. 73

Tyrion: That didn't keep you from selling her to Khal Drogo.

Illyrio: Dothraki neither buy nor sell. Say rather, that her brother Viserys gave her to Drogo to win the Khals friendship. A vain young man, and greedy. Viserys lusted for his father's throne, but he lusted for Daenerys too, and was loath to giver her up.

Also, you're taking the text out of context. That may explain some of these weird theories people come up with. When Illyrio was speaking of his doubts of Danny's survival, it was because of how weak she'd shown herself to that point. He didn't believe she had the strength to survive, and based on what we knew of Danny before his Khal, this sounds completely plausible.

ADWD. pg 73

Illyrio: Daenerys was half a child when she came to me, yet fairer even than my second wife, so lovely I was tempted to claim her for myself. Such a fearful, furitive thing, however, I knew I should get not joy from coupling with her. Instead, I summoned a bedwarmer and fucked her vigorously until the madness passed. If truth be told, I did not think Daenerys would survive for long amongst the horselords.

If he was a Targaryen loyalist, why would he sell her to Drogo and increase the chances of her death?

He didn't sell her, but her coupling with Drogo is why she has three Dragons and an army, so it all worked out in the end, I'd say.

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?

That hadn't been planning to marry her off to Drogo for years, but they had been planning to marry her off. Even now this is true. She wasn't the heir until Viserys died, this fact can't be stressed enough.

Illyrio and Varys do not support the Targaryens.

I've already outlined a long list of things they've done for both Danny and Viserys. You can't dimiss that.

They support Aegon. Daenerys was completely dispensible to their plans until she until she hatched her dragons and tore Slaver's Bay apart.

Jorah disagrees, and says as much.

"Varys said to watch you, not kill you"

Doesn't sound dispensable too me, she simply wasn't as important as Viserys and Aegon, for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they lie to who they have the opportunity to lie to. Its possible that they've lied to the Golden Company that Aegon is a Blackfyre and not a Targaryen, though. I just don't find it especially convincing. See, this is the sort of way you couch your argument if you're reasonable, and not so in love with your own position that you immediately denounce all other viewpoints as inherently illegitimate.

I would think that it would be easier to lie to the Gold Company than any other entity that would have knowlege of Aegon, especially Jon Connington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for argument's sake here, is it possible, just possible, that JC is a pawn in all this? That Illyrio/ Varys contacted the GC prior to JC's arrival, so that the GC knew that this was a Blackfyre cause, and agreed to back Aegon to JC under disguised premises?

Also, the books never set up an imperative where mummer=dragon, or that Dany slays idiots (she slays "lies"), so your devil's advocate is also pretty flawed.

Sure lets believe these points of argument based on speculation of something possibly happening ten years ago. youve convinced me.

and i was pointing out how easy it is to read into these prophecies. Just ask Melisandre how easy it is to get a prophecy wrong. patchface is a mummer, he makes wierd prophecies, there is a mummer's dragon, it must be patchface! and dany slays the lie of him being an idiot, try reading comprehension

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the involement of the Golden Company really evidence of him being a Blackfyre? It seems to me like it doesn't matter at this point. These are by and large men who want to return to the Seven Kingdoms. Does it really matter to who gets them there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, how did the GC get the idea Aegon is a blackfyre?

Uhhh - because he actually would be one?

JC is the one who told the former commander, and he supported JCs plan. When the fuck would they start believing hes a blackfyre, and why? JC also agrees with all of Illyrio's plans, so its tough to make Illyrio's plan point to Aegon being a blackfyre

When JC revealed "Aegon's" identity, its made clear the GC already knew who Aegon was/ was supposed to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×