R+L=J v 58

[Alia of the knife]

The main issue I've always had with "Aegon was saved via baby swap" is, iirc, we're first introduced to this notion via Jon.

Jon sees the danger that Mance Rayder's son is in and swaps him with Gilly's baby.

Then in the next book we have fAegon popping up with this exact same story.

To me, it just seems like classic GRRM to have the real Targ performing the act that supposedly saved the fake Targ.

:agree:

Also agree with you and Ygrain.

But I would also add that the piece where Jon does his own baby swapping is IMHO, the deliberate intention of the Author to foreshadow Jons later learning the truth of what Ned did so that he has a reference for forgiving Ned for his lies.

[MtnLion]

Did I? I think Rhaegar was plotting against Aerys.

I don't catch what you mean with transferring, but the story is told by Jaime. After Stony Sept, and before the Trident, Aerys sent Rhaella with Viserys to Dragonstone, but he refused to let Elia go, keeping her as a hostage referring to the Martells. Then he trusted Lewyn to take charge of ten thousand Dornishmen who were going up the way to KL.

Rhaegar took advantage of the need Aerys had of him. Depriving him of as many hostages as possible made perfect sense if he planned something after the Trident.

Sorry, finger, that is totally incorrect. Aerys sent Rhaella and Viserys to Dragonstone after receiving news of the Trident.

ETA: Elia was being held, not Aegon. You can't transfer Aerys holding Elia to being Aerys holding Aegon hostage.

[SFDanny]

Sorry, life gets in the way of fantasy discussions. Had a good day with my kids, and now back to Westeros. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I don't think Egg or Young Griff are that comparable here. Like I asked, are they going to dye this child's hair blue, or shave it off? Is Ned not going to wonder where this random blue-haired baby came from?

The reason both are important is to show that Martin has made it very clear that disguising Targaryen features, and hiding a character from notice that has them, is hardly a major problem that can't be overcome. But, I agree with you that hiding a one year old child by dying his hair is probably not the best option. Shaving his head is an easy and much more effective method. Perhaps in combination to a story of treatment for lice, it becomes very effective.

As to why Ned isn't going to wonder about this child. I thought I'd explained that, but let me do it again. If Ned arrives and finds his sister dying, with her newborn child at hand, then the presence of a wet nurse and the wet nurse's year old child would not strike anyone, including Ned, as odd or something to wonder about. Wet nurses are wet nurses because they have given birth previously and are still producing milk at the time they are engaged to also give milk to an expected new born. Specifically, let us suppose Wylla is at the tower, something most of us think is a highly probable part of the story explaining the presence of the "they" who find Ned holding Lyanna's dead body. Wylla is there as a wet nurse and is nursing the new born Jon, but also has a child she claims is her own. Why would Ned believe this child is something other than she claims? Why would he leap to the conclusion that this child is in fact Aegon, who he believes he saw laid at Robert's feet a month or so earlier? Ned wouldn't. Nor would most people. The only people who would be alarmed would those who are closely connected or have been closely connected to Aegon's care as child. Ned doesn't even remotely qualify as one of those people

If Ned would not question Wylla's story, and he needs her to care for Jon on a trip to Starfall, then it is easy to see how Ned, who boasts of not harming children, would allow Wylla to take her "own child" with her on the journey. Once Ned leaves Starfall with Jon, and Wylla is now with the Daynes, there is absolutely no reason for Ned to think on the child again. Much less reconsider his belief that Aegon died in the sack of King's Landing and his battered body laid before the throne as some kind of grisly trophy by Tywin Lannister.

I know you're stuck on the Aegon-at-the-Tower thing, but I am telling you, it does not pass the derp test. Or at least, it doesn't pass the derp test nearly as well as the idea that Aegon died in King's Landing, Young Griff is a fake and that Jon was the only baby at the Tower.

I got to tell you I didn't have the faintest idea what the word "derp" means, and had to go to the urban dictionary to find a meaning. Still not sure how that fits here or what a "derp test" would be, but I will take it as a kindly jibe between two people interested in the same topic and if you want to explain it in more detail, I'll respond to how this idea passes or fails such a test at a later time. If you look at my previous posts, then you know that I too think it more likely Aegon died in King's Landing, Young Griff is a fake, and Jon was the only baby at the Tower - or at least that it is more likely he was there without Aegon being there.

All the more reason to think this is a weak idea. It's one thing to successfully switch a year-old baby during the chaos of the Sack. It's another thing entirely to switch out a baby and have it stay under wraps for weeks or months.

I perhaps didn't express myself clearly. It is exactly the long-term switch that I question as implausible.

You both raise the same objection, so let me take them together. It is a double-edged sword. An expanded timeframe helps make the preparation needed for such a switch more likely to have been accomplished, but it also makes it more likely that such a switch would be discovered over a greater period of time. I'm more concerned about the former problem than the latter, and let me tell you both why. One of the major objections raised to the baby swap idea as Young Griff tells it is that Varys would have to accomplish it is a very small amount of time. I agree this is a problem, and would be even more so for Rhaegar if he has only the same small amount of time. However, Rhaegar is not without his resources, and there is no reason to think him incompetent in pulling such an intrigue off. I think Rhaegar has had his own schemes for some time and knows who his rivals in pulling them off are - his father and Varys. More time, and the ability of Rhaegar to be away from King's Landing in his duties as commander of the loyalist forces gives him advantages in bringing it about. I've already more than explained his ample reasons for wanting to do so.

As to the discovery of the switch, I think I said I think it would be discovered - after it takes place. Some servant must notice at sometime. There is only so long "Aegon" could be kept isolated. The switch of Myrcella in Dorne is a case in point. The plotters knew it would be discovered but by that time they were away. So, too, I think Aegon's switch would be discovered by Varys. I don't think it likely that Aerys spends time with his his grandson in the nursery, but I guess it would be an outside possibility of he discovering it himself. The point being I think Varys finds out, but wants to use the knowledge against Rhaegar and Elia at the appropriate time. That time never comes because Rhaegar is killed, and then Elia and Aerys soon after. What Varys does with information is what we know. He formulates his "Young Griff" plot with his good friend Illyrio.

Actually, there is something to the argument. The KL is being sacked by Tywin's men, they are approaching the Red Keep - in such a situation, why did Elia go to the changeling's room instead to her daughter in the first place?

I don't find this persuasive in the least. Sorry, about that, but we know next to nothing about the details of the sack such as when Elia becomes aware it is taking place (remember the Lannister men are welcomed into the city) or just when Gregory and Ser Armory are at her door, or where "Aegon" and Rhaenys would have been when Elia becomes aware of the danger. We certainly know that it is highly unlikely Gregor gives her any choice at all concerning which child see gets to see killed before he rapes and murders her. The idea that she has such a choice seems completely unsupported by what little we know. Therefore to think that her presence with Aegon, or the baby Aegon is switched with, signifies anything makes no sense to me.

edit: I see that lareine already responded on this point and raises a completely different interpretation of the events as possible.

[finger]

I forget, how does the conversation between Jaime and Rhaegar go, as Rhaegar is leaving for the Trident? "When I fall at the Trident . . ."?

"He "gracelessly" reminded Lewyn Martell that he "held" Elia" means the children, too, because you want Rhaegar to have a motive before he leaves, convinced that he will return victoriously? Naw, come on.

Only that those are Aerys' words before sending Martell to the Dornishmen, at the same moment that he sent Selmy and Darry to Stoney Sept, to gather the survivors.

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

Sorry, life gets in the way of fantasy discussions. Had a good day with my kids, and now back to Westeros. Sorry for the inconvenience.

The reason both are important is to show that Martin has made if very clear that disguising Targaryen features and hiding a character from notice that has them is hardly an major problem that can't be overcome. But, I agree with that hiding a one year old child by dying his hair is probably not the best option. Shaving his head is an easy and much more effective method. Perhaps in combination to a story of treatment for lice, it becomes very effective.

As to why Ned isn't going to wonder about this child. I thought I'd explained that, but let me do it again. If Ned arrives and finds his sister dying and her newborn child at hand, then the presence of a wet nurse and the wet nurse's year old child would not strike anyone, including Ned, as odd or something to wonder about. Wet nurses are wet nurses because they have given birth previously and are still producing milk at the time they are engaged to also give milk to an expected new born. Specifically, let us suppose Wylla is at the tower, something most of us think is a highly probable part of the story explaining the presence of the "they" who find Ned holding Lyanna's dead body. Wylla is there as a wet nurse and is nursing the new born Jon, but also has a child she claims is her own. Why would Ned believe this child is something other than she claims? Why would he leap to the conclusion that this child is in fact Aegon, who he believes he saw laid Robert's feet a month or so earlier? Ned wouldn't. Nor would most people. The only people who would be alarmed would those who are closely connected or have been closely connected to Aegon's care as child. Ned doesn't even remotely qualify as one of those people

If if Ned would not question Wylla's story, and he needs her to care for Jon on a trip to Starfall, then it is easy to see how Ned, who boast of not harming children, would allow Wylla to take her "own child" with her on the journey. Once Ned leaves Starfall with Jon, and Wylla is now with the Daynes, there is absolutely no reason for Ned to think on the child again. Much less reconsider his belief that Aegon died in the sack of King's Landing and his battered body laid before the throne as some kind of grisly trophy by Tywin Lannister.

I got to tell you I didn't have the faintest idea what the word "derp" means, and had to go to the urban dictionary to find a meaning. Still not sure how that fits here or what a "derp test" would be, but I will take it as a kindly jibe between two people interested in the same topic and if you want to explain it in more detail, I'll respond to how this idea passes or fails such a test at a later time. If you look at my previous posts, then you know that I too think it more likely Aegon died in King's Landing, Young Griff is a fake, and Jon was the only baby at the Tower - or at least that it is more likely he was there without Aegon being there.

You both raise the same objection, so let me take them together. It is a double-edged sword. An expanded timeframe helps make the preparation needed for such a switch more likely to have been accomplished, but it also makes it more likely that such a switch would be discovered over a greater period of time. I'm more concerned about the former problem than the latter, and let me tell you both why. One of the major objections raised to the baby swap idea as Young Griff tells it is that Varys would have to accomplish it is a very small amount of time. I agree this is a problem, and would be even more so for Rhaegar if he has only the same small amount of time. However, Rhaegar is not without his resources, and there is no reason to think him incompetent in pulling such an intrigue off. I think Rhaegar has had his own schemes for some time and knows who his rivals in pulling them off are - his father and Varys. More time, and the ability of Rhaegar to be away from King's Landing in his duties as commander of the loyalist forces gives him advantages in bringing it about. I've already more than explained his ample reasons for wanting to do so.

As to the discovery of the switch, I think I said I think it would be discovered - after it takes place. Some servant must notice at sometime. There is only so long "Aegon" could be kept isolated. The switch of Myrcella in Dorne is a case in point. The plotters knew it would be discovered but by that time they were away. So, too, I think Aegon's switch would be discovered by Varys. I don't think it likely that Aerys spends time with his his grandson in the nursery, but I guess it would be an outside possibility of he discovering it himself. The point being I think Varys finds out, but wants to use the knowledge against Rhaegar and Elia at the appropriate time. That time never comes because Rhaegar is killed, and then Elia and Aerys soon after. What Varys does with information is what we know. He formulates his "Young Griff" plot with his good friend Illyrio.

I don't find this persuasive in the least. Sorry, about that, but we know next to nothing about the details of the sack such as when Elia becomes aware it is taking place (remember the Lannister men are welcomed into the city) or just when Gregory and Ser Armory are at her door, or where "Aegon" and Rhaenys would have been when Elia becomes aware of the danger. We certainly know that it is highly unlikely Gregor gives her any choice at all concerning which child see gets to see killed before he rapes and murders her. The idea that she has such a choice seems whole unsupported by what little we know. Therefore to think that her presence with Aegon, or the baby Aegon is switched with, signifies anything makes no sense to me.

Would it be that difficult for Varys to do in a short amount of time? Varys smuggled Tyrion out of KL pretty quickly though we don't know how long Jaime had been planning that. Sansa was also smuggled out of KL pretty quickly though we know that had been planned for a while. It seems like if you know the secret passageways you could get out of KL undetected fairly quickly.

I maintain that Elia would have had to been on board because she would notice if her son is different while clutching him in her arms. Additionally, if Rhaegar had been planning to make a move against Aerys when he returned from the Trident. Having his heir removed from the castle would have been a good way to do that. If i'm not mistaken Rhaegar was at KL for a few days if not longer before the battle of the Trident. The story itself seems likely enough to make me think that Aegon may be alive.

I don't think Aegon has to be (f)Aegon in order for him to have been at the ToJ. Varys knowing of the switch could have grabbed another boy in order to pass him off as Aegon in the future. Particularly, after the Targaryens were then defeated. Varys would have lost track of Aegon.

So (f)Aegon is still fake and gets smacked down by Dany and her dragons.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

<snip>

I'm sorry but none of this is blowing my skirt up. Aegon wasn't at the Tower. Aegon is dead. There was one baby at the Tower, and it was Jon. You're making this substantially more complicated than it really needs to be. And if you actually believe that Aegon is dead, it baffles me why you keep arguing so strongly for a premise that you admit is more than likely false.

[finger]

Those are both excellent points!

I agree that Brandon Stark was most likely the one Barristan referred to. For the record, Jaime Lannister is called "Lannister" on more than one occasion. And IRL, in polite society elder children used to be called Master Last Name or Miss Last Name. Younger siblings were called Master or Miss First Name.

As for Jon's looks, I believe he was purposely kept away from anyone who might have known Rhaegar. This makes me wonder if Ned, who would have met Rhaegar at Harrenhal, didn't see something there which made him nervous. Lannisters aside, there are still people alive who would have known Rhaegar and one of them has spent quite a bit of time with Jon already. When he returns to the Wall, if he can peel his eyes away from from Mel and her nightfires, maybe Stannis Baratheon will see something that surprises him ;)

I suppose that depends on the society. They can be named after the father's lordship. For instance, a Whent could be named Jon Harrenhall, while the father could be referred to as Lord Harrenhall, or simply Harrenhall. Of course, the name can be used as well, that is Jon Whent.

Ned just wanted Jon (Snow) unnoticed to Robert, in order to avoid the topic. No wonder.

[finger]

I don't think that even as Rhaegar might have been contemplating worst case scenario, his main concern was just that there were enough Targeryan heirs littered across the kingdom to survive the purge. Jon and Aegon were also his children - he'd want them to be safe as much as he'd want the Targeryan dynasty to survive.

But supposing for one minute that it'd make perfect sense from Rhaegar's perspective to house Aegon and Jon at the same location, then why not do a swap-over with Rhaenys and bring her over to the ToJ too?

By this analogy, Rhaegar wants as many heirs as possible to survive - Aerys and Rhaenys are in Kings Landing, but Aerys is unstable. True, Rhaegar might not have appreciated how unstable he was, but if you were contemplating your potential demise, would you really leave your daughter alone in the care of this man? And, if Jon is a bastard (and hence, no treasure), it would make more sense from my POV to bring her over to the ToJ too - after all she is second in line to the throne.

Therefore this theory would make more sense to me if he'd tried to move both children rather than leaving his daughter in Kings Landing.

I accept that Ned's memory may be somewhat faint due to the lapse of time and the possible trauma of what he witnessed that day in Kings Landing. I agree that he believes that the red ruin he saw was that of Aegon, but if Aegon was alive at the ToJ when he went to seek out his sister, he wouldn't lament about Aegon in this way surely, because he'd know that Aegon had gotten out alive.

Knowing how ambiguous Ned can be (saying that Jon is his "blood" for instance rather than calling him his son), I doubt that his recollections would mention Aegon specifically when mentioning the slaughter of Elia and the Targeryan children.

When Ned arrived to ToJ, Aegon had been there.

[SFDanny]

Would it be that difficult for Varys to do in a short amount of time? Varys smuggled Tyrion out of KL pretty quickly though we don't know how long Jaime had been planning that. Sansa was also smuggled out of KL pretty quickly though we know that had been planned for a while. It seems like if you know the secret passageways you could get out of KL undetected fairly quickly.

The main difficulty is finding a suitable child to switch with Aegon. Something none of the other examples you note has to overcome. I don't know what Varys's resources are, but I think it must take some time to locate a suitable child. That Rhaegar has more time do accomplish this task makes it more likely to me that he could do so.

I maintain that Elia would have had to been on board because she would notice if her son is different while clutching him in her arms.

Absolutely agree.

Additionally, if Rhaegar had been planning to make a move against Aerys when he returned from the Trident. Having his heir removed from the castle would have been a good way to do that. If i'm not mistaken Rhaegar was at KL for a few days if not longer before the battle of the Trident. The story itself seems likely enough to make me think that Aegon may be alive.

Again, I agree, but would note that it is likely Rhaegar is in or near King's Landing for months in marshalling his forces that he brings to the Trident.

I don't think Aegon has to be (f)Aegon in order for him to have been at the ToJ. Varys knowing of the switch could have grabbed another boy in order to pass him off as Aegon in the future. Particularly, after the Targaryens were then defeated. Varys would have lost track of Aegon.

No, I agree, if this variant is true, it is more likely that one of the children at the Tower of Joy is the real Aegon. Someone the Kingsguard trio trusts - which wouldn't include Varys to my way of thinking - would have to bring the child to them. Which is why I think Ashara is the most likely candidate for the person to would bring Aegon to the Tower.

I think, if fact, Varys plot works better for himself and Illyrio if the child is not the real Aegon. It works better if the real Aegon dies. Remember, most of the people who care and instruct the Young Griff think he is Aegon by Varys, or perhaps by Varys and someone else they trust more than Varys - Ashara.

So (f)Aegon is still fake and gets smacked down by Dany and her dragons.

Something I think likely.

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

I'm sorry but none of this is blowing my skirt up. Aegon wasn't at the Tower. Aegon is dead. There was one baby at the Tower, and it was Jon. You're making this substantially more complicated than it really needs to be. And if you actually believe that Aegon is dead, it baffles me why you keep arguing so strongly for a premise that you admit is more than likely false.

I doubt SFDanny was trying to specifically blow "your" skirt up. You do realize everything you've said is just as much speculation and theory as everything SFDanny just stated? Until GRRM confirms any of these theories, it's all speculation. Maybe a theory is right, maybe a theory is wrong. But it's still a theory and good theories must be tested against other possibilities. We can learn just as much from a failed experiment as you can from a "successful" experiment. The only difference is what we're learning.

ETA:

I realize, after the fact, that this sounds bitchier than I had intended. I was trying to say. You don't have to believe his theory if you don't want to. He doesn't have to believe yours if he doesn't want to. Right now, we're all just writing the story the way we want it.

[SFDanny]

I'm sorry but none of this is blowing my skirt up. Aegon wasn't at the Tower. Aegon is dead. There was one baby at the Tower, and it was Jon. You're making this substantially more complicated than it really needs to be. And if you actually believe that Aegon is dead, it baffles me why you keep arguing so strongly for a premise that you admit is more than likely false.

No problem. I get it that you believe all the above to be more likely true, and as I've said so do I. I think it is also very important to look at what is new in the story and try to understand what are possible directions the story is going. That is why I keep trying to show people like yourself this could be true. I'm trying to point out that one of the most significant changes in the story with the publication of A Dance with Dragons is the presence of a character who claims to be Aegon. Specifically, for people like yourself and I, who have long argued for the importance of the actions of the Kingsguard trio concerning who was at the tower of joy. I think we have to take into account various possibilities. Besides, we have a long time to consider them before the next book. It gets boring making the same points over and over.

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

The main difficulty is finding a suitable child to switch with Aegon. Something none of the other examples you note has to overcome. I don't know what Varys's resources are, but I think it must take some time to locate a suitable child. That Rhaegar has more time do accomplish this task makes it more likely to me that he could do so.

At the time Aegon is like 1 years old, other than "white" how much more suitable would he need to be? Remember this was just a switch to get Aegon out of harms way for a while, or get him to safety if need be.

No, I agree, if this variant is true, it is more likely that one of the children at the Tower of Joy is the real Aegon. Someone the Kingsguard trio trusts - which wouldn't include Varys to my way of thinking - would have to bring the child to them. Which is why I think Ashara is the most likely candidate for the person to would bring Aegon to the Tower.

I like Hightower simply because we know he was at KL before the Trident and we know where he is after the battle. Ashara could have taken Aegon to Starfall after the battle of the trident. Or Ned could have taken him. There are many other possibilities.

I think, if fact, Varys plot works better for himself and Illyrio if the child is not the real Aegon. It works better if the real Aegon dies. Remember, most of the people who care and instruct the Young Griff think he is Aegon by Varys, or perhaps by Varys and someone else they trust more than Varys - Ashara.

Something I think likely.

Why would Varys and Illyrio trust Ashara? Or do you mean Rhaegar and Elia trusted Ashara?

[MtnLion]

Only that those are Aerys' words before sending Martell to the Dornishmen, at the same moment that he sent Selmy and Darry to Stoney Sept, to gather the survivors.

Again, tell me where you see "Aegon" or "Rhaenys" in the quote. How can you insist that Aegon was being held hostage when it is unsupported. I give you that Elia was. I, also know that this was what Aerys said to Lewyn when he sent him to gather the Dornish troops and head for the Trident. Elia was kept at the Red Keep when Raella and Viserys were sent to Dragonstone, because she was being held hostage to keep the remaining Dornish troops loyal. Aegon and Rhaella are Aerys' blood relatives, and he is not holding them hostage, they are merely staying with their mother.

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

Again, tell me where you see "Aegon" or "Rhaenys" in the quote. How can you insist that Aegon was being held hostage when it is unsupported. I give you that Elia was. I, also know that this was what Aerys said to Lewyn when he sent him to gather the Dornish troops and head for the Trident. Elia was kept at the Red Keep when Raella and Viserys were sent to Dragonstone, because she was being held hostage to keep the remaining Dornish troops loyal. Aegon and Rhaella are Aerys' blood relatives, and he is not holding them hostage, they are merely staying with their mother.

I don't think Rhaegar or Elia could count on Aery's temperance or sound judgement. Anyone at KL was in danger of Aerys whether he said that flat out or not. Aegon and Rhaenys as well.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

No problem. I get it that you believe all the above to be more likely true, and as I've said so do I. I think it is also very important to look at what is new in the story and try to understand what are possible directions the story is going. That is why I keep trying to show people like yourself this could be true. I'm trying to point out that one of the most significant changes in the story with the publication of A Dance with Dragons is the presence of a character who claims to be Aegon. Specifically, for people like yourself and I, who have long argued for the importance of the actions of the Kingsguard trio concerning who was at the tower of joy. I think we have to take into account various possibilities. Besides, we have a long time to consider them before the next book. It gets boring making the same points over and over.

It also gets boring spending time on theories that are in all likelihood false. It's one thing to look at various possibilities, but at some point you have to either reject those possibilities or accept them as plausible. Aegon at the Tower is one that I rejected long ago as just not making that much sense and as such even discussing it seems counterproductive given that it's a complete dead end. Agree to disagree, I guess.

ETA:

I realize, after the fact, that this sounds bitchier than I had intended. I was trying to say. You don't have to believe his theory if you don't want to. He doesn't have to believe yours if he doesn't want to. Right now, we're all just writing the story the way we want it.

Yeah see I don't really care.

[Mladen]

I doubt SFDanny was trying to specifically blow "your" skirt up. You do realize everything you've said is just as much speculation and theory as everything SFDanny just stated? Until GRRM confirms any of these theories, it's all speculation. Maybe a theory is right, maybe a theory is wrong. But it's still a theory and good theories must be tested against other possibilities. We can learn just as much from a failed experiment as you can from a "successful" experiment. The only difference is what we're learning.

No difference between speculation and theory is that theory is based on something. Speculation doesn't have to be. I can speculate about this or that without any proofs, but this theory has hundreds of pages of ASOIAF proving it, and NOT EVEN ONE that denies it. You all have to understand that GRRM can't change course that radically, he is bound by previous 5 books...

[MtnLion]

No problem. I get it that you believe all the above to be more likely true, and as I've said so do I. I think it is also very important to look at what is new in the story and try to understand what are possible directions the story is going. That is why I keep trying to show people like yourself this could be true. I'm trying to point out that one of the most significant changes in the story with the publication of A Dance with Dragons is the presence of a character who claims to be Aegon. Specifically, for people like yourself and I, who have long argued for the importance of the actions of the Kingsguard trio concerning who was at the tower of joy. I think we have to take into account various possibilities. Besides, we have a long time to consider them before the next book. It gets boring making the same points over and over.

Let me point out some of the weaknesses in this scenario:

• Someone has to be concerned about Aegon (not Rhaenys) and know about the tower. That leaves out Rhaegar, but it also leaves out everybody else.
  
• Someone needs to find a substitute and let Elia in on the secret. Elia is not going to clutch a child that is not hers in a time of stress. She does not know that she will die, Aegon will die, and Rhaenys will die, until it happens, and then it is too late for hindsight.
  
• Someone needs to transport said baby in an illogical direction, Dragonstone is closer and safer. Braavos, Pentos, all of Essos cannot be ruled out, though they are ignored in many arguments. (Before you say the tower is safer, think about it. There are three Kingsguard there, yet Ned gets to Lyanna and son. It takes a year for rebel forces to get to Dragonstone.)
  
• Then we have to make assumptions that Wylla was at the tower.
  
• Assumptions that Wylla claimed Aegon as her own child, but where is her real child?
  
• Assumptions that Wylla was secretly working with someone to hide Aegon and transport him to Ashara?
  

No, far too many assumptions, that cannot be explained away. There is nothing that even hints at any of these assumptions. The child switching can easily be aimed at showing that Varys had done it, and taken Aegon to Pentos. It is another thing to make up a story to move him to tower, which is completely illogical. The only logic is an attempt to dispute the prrof of the Kingsguard guarding the heir at the tower, everything else is manufactured, and the dispute is also manufactured. Jon is the child at the tower that the Kingsguard are protecting and defending. Aegon is dead, or in Varys' and Illyrio's hands.

[MtnLion]

I don't think Rhaegar or Elia could count on Aery's temperance or sound judgement. Anyone at KL was in danger of Aerys whether he said that flat out or not. Aegon and Rhaenys as well.

I'm sorry, page back a little you will see that it has been demonstrated that this belief is folly. Jaime did not believe that Aerys would harm the children, and he didn't, though he did try to burn King's Landing down.

[Ser Creighton]

Also agree with you and Ygrain.

But I would also add that the piece where Jon does his own baby swapping is IMHO, the deliberate intention of the Author to foreshadow Jons later learning the truth of what Ned did so that he has a reference for forgiving Ned for his lies.

Ned did what he did for Jon's safety so there really isn't anything to forgive. Ned went out of his way to break the Norms of the relationships of Bastards in order to protect Jon. Sure he could of told Jon the truth, but Jon was only 14 and often acted very much like a 14 year old. Jon could easily blurt something out in the heat of the moment and then the cat is out of the bag and it's not going back in. It's also the kind of secret that is not just a danger to Jon, but to Ned, his family and the north.

We already learned more than once not to make Robert angry dude gets just a little crazy when he is upset. Jon actually owes Ned more of a thanks than he does a "I forgive him." We alrady know what kind of personal hell Ned went through to keep this secret. Granted we don't know the full story but we know enough to know Ned struggled and suffered through Jons secret.

[Lissa Nymeros Martell]

It also gets boring spending time on theories that are in all likelihood false. It's one thing to look at various possibilities, but at some point you have to either reject those possibilities or accept them as plausible. Aegon at the Tower is one that I rejected long ago as just not making that much sense and as such even discussing it seems counterproductive given that it's a complete dead end. Agree to disagree, I guess.

"Agree to disagree" is a beautiful phrase. Great way to end further discussion in theories that you find boring and have previously rejected. Without denying anyone else the freedom and enjoyment of their own thoughts.

I'm sorry, page back a little you will see that it has been demonstrated that this belief is folly. Jaime did not believe that Aerys would harm the children, and he didn't, though he did try to burn King's Landing down.

Is Jaime savvy enough to know one way or the other? At this point he'd only been with Aerys a year. It takes awhile to realize crazy means completely unpredictable. Even though Jaime knew there were wildfire stores all over the city, He was surprised when Aerys gave the order to light them. It's quite likely that Aery's family would recognize that Aerys was unhinging earlier than Jaime would. I'll go back a few pages and find what was written about it.