since when is Aegon (F)Aegon?

[Knight Of Winter]

Just remember that there are really two separate theories—Aegon is not really Rhaegar's son Aegon, and Aegon is really a Blackfyre. While the second obviously implies the first, the other way around is not true, even if most of the fans and detractors of the theory often forget that.

Most of the evidence provided for fAegon Blackfyre actually only supports fAegon.

This is a good point, and the reason I don't believe Aegon=Blackfyre theory. Evidence/hints/implications for Aegon=fake are plenty, but when it comes to proving that Aegon actually is Blackfyre, theory makes lots of assumptions and predictions that aren't necessarily correct, but are needed as such in order to fit the theory.

I made a thread a while ago explaining my reasoning: Why is Aegon not a Blackfyre

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Also the fact Aegon is introduced in the fifth book in the series. Whereas regardless which one you rally behind Jon Snow and Daenarys have been there from the start.

Aegon being real or not has nothing to do with sitting the throne.

He can very well be the real thing... but just not sit the throne for very long.. Real Targaryens can be killed too :)

The reason I really doubt Aegon is Rhaegar's son is because I doubt even Varys could have pulled that baby switch off. And why not save Elia and Rhaenys if he was able to get people out of KL unseen?

I believe Aegon might very well be Aegon Targaryen, just not THAT Aegon Targaryen.

Then which Aegon Targaryen? :)

[jet199]

There is also the theory that fAegon is actually the real Aegon but the real Aegon was Arthur Dayne's bastard and Elia had pulled a Cersei. This led to Rhaegar thinking he needed to get more kids fast and abducting Lyanna.

I would laugh so hard if this were true but I think a Blackfyre+Brightflame (maybe even +Black Pearl) origin for fAegon is more likely.

[falcotron]

Then which Aegon Targaryen? :)

Well, if people can suggest that Rhaegar is still alive disguised as Mance, maybe Aegon I is still alive, frozen in an ice cave at the Wall to be thawed out in the time of the Targaryens' greatest need and repeat his conquest. :)

[joluoto2]

Aegon being real or not has nothing to do with sitting the throne.

He can very well be the real thing... but just not sit the throne for very long.. Real Targaryens can be killed too :)

Then which Aegon Targaryen? :)

Either a Blackfyre descendant or a descendant of Aerion Brightflame.

[Leonardo]

Thanks for the explanation.

I would not be surprised if he were real, because As Varys said, replacing one baby with another is very easy. (Jon Snow did it with Gilly's baby and Mance Rayder's Son at the Wall.) Besides the Blackfyre is a little far-fetched to me. The Blackfyre rebellion was a hundred years ago. That means the distaff side of the Blackfyres has been waiting a hundred years for a chance? Definitely far-fetched.

BTW, "distaff side" is a phrase referring to inheritance from the female line, or to the female line in general. You learn the most interesting things from historical novels...

It wasnt a hundred years, their last attempt was the war of the nine penny kings around 50 years ago, along with at least one other BF rebellion in Westeros, detailed in the Mystery Knight.

[Chebyshov]

This is a good point, and the reason I don't believe Aegon=Blackfyre theory. Evidence/hints/implications for Aegon=fake are plenty, but when it comes to proving that Aegon actually is Blackfyre, theory makes lots of assumptions and predictions that aren't necessarily correct, but are needed as such in order to fit the theory.

:agree:

The Blackfyre stuff is borne of people trying to make D&E material foreshadow what's to come in ASOIAF. Maybe it does (despite GRRM saying that they stand alone and won't act as spoilers), but going by the text of ASOIAF alone, there just isn't that much there.

I compiled evidence for possibilities of Aegon's identity (http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/109569-aegon-vis-identity-compiling-the-evidence/), though there's certainly variations I didn't fully explicate.

[Leonardo]

:agree:

The Blackfyre stuff is borne of people trying to make D&E material foreshadow what's to come in ASOIAF. Maybe it does (despite GRRM saying that they stand alone and won't act as spoilers), but going by the text of ASOIAF alone, there just isn't that much there.

I compiled evidence for possibilities of Aegon's identity (http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/109569-aegon-vis-identity-compiling-the-evidence/), though there's certainly variations I didn't fully explicate.

Except that no matter how you break it down, the Golden Company deserting their contract with myr to support a TARG is a huge hint. Illyrio isn't going to be able to outbid the entire city of mry as he is only one of many top dogs in pentos.

If they present Aegon with Blackfyre, it is going to be a HUGE confirmation of the blackfyre theories. And why should it matter? The whole basis of daemons claim is he was just as much a targaryen as the trueborns and had a better claim than his not brother daeron, who almost assuredly was a bastard of the dragonknight.

The "they wanna go home" tag line is ridiculous as most of them have never even SEEN westeros. To join aegon by breaking their contract shatters the whole premise of their founding and spits in bitter steels face. Considering the head is still around the only thing that makes sense is they are finally fulfilling their true purpose.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Except that no matter how you break it down, the Golden Company deserting their contract with myr to support a TARG is a huge hint. Illyrio isn't going to be able to outbid the entire city of mry as he is only one of many top dogs in pentos.

If they present Aegon with Blackfyre, it is going to be a HUGE confirmation of the blackfyre theories. And why should it matter? The whole basis of daemons claim is he was just as much a targaryen as the trueborns and had a better claim than his not brother daeron, who almost assuredly was a bastard of the dragonknight.

The "they wanna go home" tag line is ridiculous as most of them have never even SEEN westeros. To join aegon by breaking their contract shatters the whole premise of their founding and spits in bitter steels face. Considering the head is still around the only thing that makes sense is they are finally fulfilling their true purpose.

Not having any information from that time in history, and having only heard rumours, whilst keeping in mind that Naerys was very much into the Faith, we don't have anything to say anything about Daeron's parentage.

On the "Aegon is a Targaryen" possibility and the GC's involvement: the arguments about fAegon containing the GC can be read in a "Aegon is a Targaryen" king of way :):

Some contracts are written in ink, and some in blood. We learn from Tyrion that contracts can actually be signed in blood (he signs his contract with the Second Sons in his own blood). In the Theon sample chapter from Winds, we learn that Stannis signs his contract with the Iron Bank of Braavos in blood as well. This can be taken literal, and should not have to indicate that the GC will only support Blackfyres. We have absolutely no indication that Bittersteel, nor any Blackfyre, has signed a contract with the GC in his own blood. And in any case, Blackfyre blood and Targaryen blood are, no matter how you turn it, the same.

Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon & Daenerys will give the exiles what Bittersteel and the Blackfyres never could. She will take them home. The last Blackfyre pretender is dead, and with that ended any possible Blackfyre contracts.

"It's home they want, as much as gold."

This we learn in Feast about the Golden Company. So the GC wants to go home, yet, they still want to be paid for it. Illyrio has lots of gold, enough to pay them with. Home, they can get by supporting the red dragons who are still at large: Daenerys and Aegon. Dany and Aegon will do what the Blackfyre’s couldn’t: they will take them home.

Also note the order in which they are mentioned. Black or red. Black first, which supports the idea that at first the GC supported the black dragon, but that now, they support the red dragon. The order might mean nothing.. but it might mean something.

The black iron dragon turning red with rust: The Clanking Dragon was the name of the Inn at the Crossroads a long time ago, when it still had a black, three-headed iron dragon as a sign. This sign, however, was destroyed by Lord Darry after Daemon Blackfyre rose in rebellion against King Daeron, and hacked to pieces. It was then cast into the water, and disappeared for a long time.

Until one of the dragon heads washed up again, red with rust.

There are a few parallels between the Clanking Dragon, and the Golden Company:

• Long Jon Heddle created the sign for his inn, as Bittersteel created the GC.
• The dragon sign is described as the biggest sign we have seen until now, and the Golden Company is the biggest mercenary company we have seen until now
• The inn, because of its big sign, became known far and wide, and the Golden Company is also known far and wide
• The Dragon sign had once been black, just as the Golden Company once supported the Blackfyres. Then, the dragons disappeared, just as the Blackfyres died and there was no one left for the Golden Company to be loyal to. Then one of the dragons turned red, suggesting that the Golden Company's loyalty has changed into loyalty towards the Targaryens.

Originally, the sign had three heads. Three black heads were thrown away, and only one red head came back. This could be viewed as the Blackfyres who all disappeared (they all died), and now, only the red dragon (Aegon) is left.

The fact that the Golden Company agreed to support all three of the known Red Dragons at one point (they were supposed to join with Viserys, they are now supporting Aegon, they were willing to have Daenerys join them), also suggests shifted loyalty. A true Blackfyre supporter would not agree to join forces with a Targaryen (Daenerys). Also, it is unlikely a Blackfyre supporter would agree to placing a Blackfyre on the throne, without ever being able to call him a Blackfyre, having to call him and all his descendants a Targaryen instead.

So the presence of the GC might not be such a great Blackfyre hint.

Above all, the "they want to go home" line is very accurate. It has been almsot 40 years since the last Blackfyre lived. Most of those in the GC never met a Blackfyre. Why would they fight for the cause of a dead man?

As to breaking their contract: If they succeed in returning home, there won't be a GC anymore, and there won't be a reputation to keep. Also, it was Bittersteels objective to place a Blackfyre on the throne, but was that always the objective of the entire GC? Or was the objective of the GC to return to their former seats in Westeros?

[Leonardo]

Except that the blackfyres only died out in the male line. House Lannister traces its lineage to Lann through the female line as well.

You are really reaching with some of the clanking dragons similarities to the GC lol, though some are good.

As for the thing with aemon and naerys, history is written by the victors, but even this little tidbit made it all the way down the line and is as confirmed as we are ever likely to get.

Its not about a contract, its the fact its the basis of their entire creation. Not to mention that Tyrion isn't going to live up to his contract at all lol.

[Chebyshov]

The fact that the Golden Company agreed to support all three of the known Red Dragons at one point (they were supposed to join with Viserys, they are now supporting Aegon, they were willing to have Daenerys join them), also suggests shifted loyalty. A true Blackfyre supporter would not agree to join forces with a Targaryen (Daenerys). Also, it is unlikely a Blackfyre supporter would agree to placing a Blackfyre on the throne, without ever being able to call him a Blackfyre, having to call him and all his descendants a Targaryen instead.

So the presence of the GC might not be such a great Blackfyre hint.

Above all, the "they want to go home" line is very accurate. It has been almsot 40 years since the last Blackfyre lived. Most of those in the GC never met a Blackfyre. Why would they fight for the cause of a dead man?

Exactly. The GC broke their contract for distinctly Red dragons, not Black.

“Which plan?” said Tristan Rivers. “The fat man’s plan? The one that changes every time the moon turns? First Viserys Targaryen was to join us with fifty thousand Dothraki screamers at his back.Then the Beggar King was dead, and it was to be the sister, a pliable young child queen who was on her way to Pentos with three new-hatched dragons. Instead the girl turns up on Slaver’s Bay and leaves a string of burning cities in her wake, and the fat man decides we should meet her by Volantis. Now that plan is in ruins as well."

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Except that the blackfyres only died out in the male line. House Lannister traces its lineage to Lann through the female line as well.

You are really reaching with some of the clanking dragons similarities to the GC lol, though some are good.

As for the thing with aemon and naerys, history is written by the victors, but even this little tidbit made it all the way down the line and is as confirmed as we are ever likely to get.

Its not about a contract, its the fact its the basis of their entire creation. Not to mention that Tyrion isn't going to live up to his contract at all lol.

Yes, the Blackfyres died out in the male line. But that doesn't make any potential descendants from the female line Blackfyres.

Example: Robb Stark descents from Hoster Tully through Hosters daughter Catelyn. Robb, however, is a Stark, and once crowned, was King Robb Stark, not King Robb Tully. Any son of one of Daemons daughters will carry the name of whichever man she married.

The Aemon/Naerys/Aegon = Daeron thing is what started the whole legitimacy of the war. Of course it's recorded in history books. Also, Maester Aemon, who was alive around the time of the Blackfyre Rebellion (having been born only 2 years after the first rebellion ended), when speaking about it, was speaking about close relatives of his. And even he didn't know the truth.

Whether Tyrion will live up to his contract, we don't know. Tyrion doesn't have a strong position, right now. He's hated in most of Westeros, has no money, has no real allies. If he doesn't make good on his contracts, he stands a very likely chance of dying. I can see Tyrion living up to his contracts... to all those who survive the war, of course.

The basis for the GCs creation was to return to Westeros, since all the men in it were exiled. That is going to happen now, that's their original "contract" of sorts.

[Leonardo]

Yes, the Blackfyres died out in the male line. But that doesn't make any potential descendants from the female line Blackfyres.

Example: Robb Stark descents from Hoster Tully through Hosters daughter Catelyn. Robb, however, is a Stark, and once crowned, was King Robb Stark, not King Robb..

The basis for the GCs creation was to return to Westeros, since all the men in it were exiled. That is going to happen now, that's their original "contract" of sorts.

It gives them the right to the name blackfyre and by extension the name targaryen along with a claim to the iron throne however watered down.

And that is fuckin hosh posh and you are deliberately twisting history. Bitter steel founded it to fight for the blackfyre claim, it just so happens the cause attracted exiles as well.

And like Danny, its not really their home as they've never seen it, not to mention there aren't near as any lords descendants in the GC as before as we have seen evidenced. Its a.pretty shaky basis to go to war for considering their claims are.almost nonexistent

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

And that is fuckin hosh posh and you are deliberately twisting history. Bitter steel founded it to fight for the blackfyre claim, it just so happens the cause attracted exiles as well.

And like Danny, its not really their home as they've never seen it, not to mention there aren't near as any lords descendants in the GC as before as we have seen evidenced. Its a.pretty shaky basis to go to war for considering their claims are.almost nonexistent

I'm not twisting history. Aegor Rivers fled to Essos after the Blackfyre Rebellion ended in 196AC. Just like many of Daemons supporters did.. All those exiled supported started joining sellsword companies, and Aegor saw the former Blackfyre strength disappearing, so he formed the GC, combining them all under one cause.

So originally, the GC existed out of those exiled from Westeros due to the Blackfyre Rebellion.

As to your last point: exactly. They've never seen Westeros (most of them). They are the grandsons and great-grandsons of those who were once exiled by Daeron II. But why would that mean that they cannot press a claim? They've never seen a Blackfyre before either, yet there are entire theories that claim the GC is doing it all for a Blackfyre.

All those who once fought for Aegors cause have died. Little by little, the cause simply disappeared. People sign on because they want gold, or a purpose. Look at Jon Connington. He did not believe in the Blackfyre cause for a second, yet he was part of the GC for 5 years. And like him, there will be many others in the GC.

[Consigliere]

This has been mentioned several times in previous Aegons identity threads. The whole assumption that Aegon is Rhaegars son comes from Varys. It is Varys' word that provides the only real evidence that Aegon is Rhaegars son and even that is highly debatable. Note that Varys never specifically says Rhaegars son - Kevan makes an assumption and Varys niether confirms nor denies this. So whether Aegon is real or not comes down to Varys and whether his word can be believed. This is a man who has made a living pretending to be people he is not. I think Aegon is not Rhaegars son. There is already a hidden son of Rhaegar up north and Aegon being a son as well would be superfluous.

[In A Coat of Gold]

Except that no matter how you break it down, the Golden Company deserting their contract with myr to support a TARG is a huge hint. Illyrio isn't going to be able to outbid the entire city of mry as he is only one of many top dogs in pentos.

If they present Aegon with Blackfyre, it is going to be a HUGE confirmation of the blackfyre theories. And why should it matter? The whole basis of daemons claim is he was just as much a targaryen as the trueborns and had a better claim than his not brother daeron, who almost assuredly was a bastard of the dragonknight.

The "they wanna go home" tag line is ridiculous as most of them have never even SEEN westeros. To join aegon by breaking their contract shatters the whole premise of their founding and spits in bitter steels face. Considering the head is still around the only thing that makes sense is they are finally fulfilling their true purpose.

The GC was fully behind backing Dany and she is a Targ.

[In A Coat of Gold]

This has been mentioned several times in previous Aegons identity threads. The whole assumption that Aegon is Rhaegars son comes from Varys. It is Varys' word that provides the only real evidence that Aegon is Rhaegars son and even that is highly debatable. Note that Varys never specifically says Rhaegars son - Kevan makes an assumption and Varys niether confirms nor denies this. So whether Aegon is real or not comes down to Varys and whether his word can be believed. This is a man who has made a living pretending to be people he is not. I think Aegon is not Rhaegars son. There is already a hidden son of Rhaegar up north and Aegon being a son as well would be superfluous.

Now Varys has to spell it out? What other Aegon could there be? There is little to no evidence that he's fake.

[Consigliere]

Now Varys has to spell it out? What other Aegon could there be? There is little to no evidence that he's fake.

If you read the conversation with Kevan closely, Varys was clearly referring to Aegon who landed in the Stormlands. Said nothing about Rhaegars son. Kevan makes that assumption only in his mind.

[Damon_Tor]

im interested inthe (f)Aegon theories, but at the same time i dont really know any justifiation that he could be fake other than Varys might have taken some random baby and given him Targaryen features. does the theory say that hes 100% fake or that hes a Blackfyre?

tl;dr: someone please explain the (f)Aegon theory to me >_>

Much of it is meta: many people find it unlikely that such a character would be introduced so late in the series if he were legit: you get the fans all worked up over who has the better claim for the throne (Jon, assuming R+L=J is accurate AND that R+J were married before his birth, has a stronger claim than Dany) then suddenly "lol, nm, the real king was here all along!" It would be like watching a basketball game, and one side rooting for Kobe, the other side rooting for LeBron, then all of a sudden the mascot takes off his mask and IT'S MICHAEL JORDAN THE WHOLE TIME.

Basically, they spent the first 3 novels rooting for one claimant or another, and there wasn't room in their hearts for another one.

The rest of it comes from the idea that he's "the mummer's dragon" which many people interpret to mean "fake dragon".

[Fae Boleyn]

You're right that it doesn't demolish R+L=J. It does demolish R+L=J making Jon king somehow. Really, if R+L=J doesn't make Jon king, than it's little more than a fun fact and the 81 (and counting) threads about it might be overkill. That's why they can't accept Aegon is real. It's the same reason they can't accept Jon is dead. Both would make Jon's parentage just another question instead of the central question of the books.

Well, tbh I don't think Jon is dead either. He might be, but I'm not convinced. After all, at one point in ASOS it seemed clear Arya had just had an axe put through her skull, but it turned out to have been the hilt knocking her out. George is tricky, I'll wait till I see a corpse and Ghost unwarged. I don't see Jon being King - I think his parentage will be relevant but not for that reason.

Then again my ideal is a real!Aegon marrying Shireen Baratheon a la Henry Tudor and Elizabeth of York to unite the claims (though Jon could do that too, I guess). I mean assuming Westeros has one king at all at the end, which it may not.

@Veltigar, you may be biased but your Brightfyre idea is my favorite impostor Aegon theory, so I agree it's quite good.

I also have a crackpot theory of my own that Aegon is both real but also tied to Blackfyres/Brightflames/both through his mother's side since we have no idea who the late Princess of Dorne's consort was. If I were to be right about this I'd fall off my chair in shock but trying to see if there was a way for everyone to be kinda right amused me.