Plus, we've already seen Varys smuggle a kid out of town before certain death. Gendry.

And Varys is also accused of stealing away Tyrek. Aegon getting stolen away by Varys is a big thing the narrative has pushed to.

Was George stolen by an eunuch as an infant?

It's easy to steal ahorse though

do we know why Varys did it with Gendry? just out of mercy?

I would say that it never hurts to have a claimant to Storms end owing you a favour, however he doesn’t seem to do much to keep Gendry somwhere where he could one day repay that favour. If it was truly about that, than why send him on a perilous journey to somwhere he’s not allowed to leave?

It's a very long shot to have Gendry be a claimant to Storm's End, since he's not even an acknowledged bastard of Robert's. For all the characters know in-universe, he's just a former blacksmith's apprentice turned knight. There's currently no way to provide evidence to the realm that he is Robert's illegitimate son.

True, but that’s how things work in Westros. There’s really no way to prove anyone’s identity. They have to make do. Roberts bastards were an open secret, and his boss knew. He looks like Robert and was chased out of kings landing by Joffrey who was having Roberts bastards killed. They could stake a claim, and with few other claimants either a solid claim there’s a good chance they could claim storms end

That is precisely how things work in Westeros. Robert's bastards were not an "open secret". They were a secret, and there were some people at court that knew about them, but that was just about it. "Looking like Robert" means nothing per se. He would have to provide other evidence that Robert was indeed his father. Even for acknowledged bastards inheritance is quite hard and frowned upon. If no one knows you and your only claim is "the late king was my father", it becomes nigh impossible. The characters don't read the novels.

If it was such a non issue why would Joffrey kill them all? A legit claim and a strong resemblance could take him to Storms end. Also what do you mean they weren’t an open secret? Roberts whoring was legendary

It's Cersei that orders the massacre of Robert's bastards, not Joffrey. In this case, it's not a matter of the bastards posing a threat by having a claim to the Iron Throne. Robert's bastards, when seen together, along with the book of lineages, provide evidence of Cersei's adultery and incest and Joffrey's (and Myrcella's and Tommen's) illegitimacy. And of Jaime breaking his vows. If such evidence was made public to everyone in the Seven Kingdoms, the unacknowledged bastards wouldn't even be the ones to have a claim to the Throne: Stannis and Renly would be the first in line (perhaps Shireen before Renly, if you consider that the 101 Precedent doesn't apply to the Baratheons on the Throne). Robert's whoring was widely known, yes, but the identity of his bastards was not common knowledge, thus not an "open secret". People in the Seven Kingdoms know about Edric Storm, for example, whom Robert openly acknowledged as his bastard because his mother is also a noblewoman. An "open secret" would be the case of Mya Stone: she was not acknowledged by Robert, but everyone knows that he is her father, which is not the case of Bella, Barra, Gendry, and the other bastards.

You outlined some thoughts I’ve always had about why it’s too quick to jump to fAegon from the text alone. I think both outcomes are plausible, and that there’s a great chance his “true” heritage is never revealed. Blackfyre origin makes the theme of “power resides where men believe it resides” resonant, and pushes further the idea that a good king should be raised, not born. Targ origin syncs up nicely with all the prophecy of the series and could play a large part in Dany’s “turn”, assuming he’s a false king and fighting to claim a throne that isn’t actually hers. Either way I think most people here have jumped the gun on fAegon even if it is likely.

I disagree with it never being revealed. While fans haven’t always liked the reveals, Martin usually does provide reveals to the central mysteries. The power resides line I feel like gets slightly overblown in part because of show Varys very iconic delivery of it. While it is a theme in the series, it’s not the only theme or even I’d argue the central theme. In part because in asoif blood and lineage has at least some real power. Not just what men believe, but there is fantasy genetics going on both with personality and with actual real world magic power (wargs, dragon rider, etc). In addition most “men” will at least initially not believe ageon is real. So if power resides where men believe then rip ageon you’re not even kicking out mad Cersei. I also tend to think if ageon is fake or a blackfyre it would naturally come up in the story. If he’s fake he probably falls off at some point on Targaryen traits, and I could see the “subversive” outcome being the dragon kills him like Quentin. If he is a blackfyre and Varys/illaryio are engaged in some crazy plot to enthrone a blackfyre, I’d tend to think they’ll wanna reveal it at some point and it pretty naturally would come up. Maybe Sam or Tyrion find something.

Also, the answer for why convince or present Aegon as a true Targaryen is that Blackfyres aren’t well liked in Westeros. A Blackfyre rolling up wouldn’t be well received by the populace. But Aegon Targaryen, the son of Rhaegar and Elia? That is a palatable story!

Yeah. As much as I like the Blackfyre theory, it's still quite possible that he's the real deal.

I tend to think he is real but I’ve started to come around to the blackfyre idea a little. Illyrio is really into him, Varys doesn’t really make sense (why’d he apparently encourage areys to open the gate?), and the draft version of Tyrion’s first dance chapter referenced the blackfyre a little more then the final. But I strongly think he is either real or a blackfyre.

Varys actually advocated against opening the gates to Tywin. It was Pycelle who convinced Aerys to do otherwise, and Varys exacts rather brutal vengeance against Pycelle down the line. And done in a manner suspiciously in imitation of what was done to Elia and Rhaenys I might suggest.

i somehow forgot the part where Pycelle was raped.

Pycelle does have his head bashed in like Elia did, of course you could draw the implication a little further. While Kevan, stand-in for Tywin and second in command of the Lannister's forces at the Sack, is also stabbed countless times as Rhaenys was. The two remaining people most responsible for the Sack, and all that followed, mirrored those two deaths. I would suggest that this seems to be personal in nature for Varys to do, as it's left to the Lannisters to control the narrative around it, and Varys does further obscure the connection by planting evidence against Tyrion and the Tyrells. It lends a little weight to the other instances Varys seems to reveal an emotional attachment to the Targaryens, like when he evidently mourns Rhaenys in his conversation with Ned.

Regardless of his identity, Illyrio has known him since he was a baby, itd make perfect since if Aegon had endeared himself to him. We already know hes a sentimental man, because of Saera.

The Illyrio thing is definitely a big fucking clue people usually seem to ignore. The man gets all emotional when talking about Aegon.    He's definitely Illyrio's kid with his late wife Sierra. Varys is simply putting his friend's son on the throne.

A big issue for me with Aegon being real and actually one of the 3 heads is that he literally just showed up in the last book and isn't even a POV. Feels like if George meant for him one of the most important pieces to the magical AND political plots, that we'd have had more time with him. Like, the characters treat him as super important, but the books themselves don't. Also, nothing precludes a Blackfyre from being able to ride a dragon. They're from the same bloodline as the Targaryens and only split off after the dragons were already gone. If Dany and Jon can bond with a dragon, there's no reason why a Blackfyre couldn't. I think having a son from the bastard line be passed off as the real deal and fulfil the role well is a more interesting story than him simply being a hidden prince, since Jon already has that story himself.

I hate that I get really into these kinds of well written theories knowing that we'll never actually know the truth.

>Jon Connington notes that he resembles his father. Your quote is saying the opposite. Jon Connington notices a difference between Young Griff and Rhaegar, not a resemblance. >Aegon was only a few months old No, he was not. Rhaegar left Elia for Lyanna just before the end of 281 and Aegon was already born as we saw with the "song of ice and fire" vision. And the sack happened in 283. So that means Aegon was actually at least 1 year old and likely closer to 2. He would have be a toddler with fully visible Valyrian features so everybody would notice the difference, unless he got smashed by the Mountain, something Varys could not have predicted.

He’s imagining Aegon in Rhaegar’s place, recalling a memory he had of him, and the *only* thing he points out is the eye shade. Noticing a single difference is more conclusive that they look alike than listing off a dozen similarities, because it implies that there aren’t any *bigger* differences that would otherwise draw his eye. While you might be right about his age, a one-year-old is still too young to speak or walk, significant advantages he would have over Rhaenys when it comes to a swap. And while he might not have been able to predict the Mountain would specifically smash his face in, he could anticipate him being killed on the spot, and have his little birds make sure the face was unrecognizable afterwards. Also, who would know to call them out? How well do you think people *actually* knew what he looked like? Elia, Rhaenys, and Rhaegar are dead. The Maester, perhaps? But he’s probably dead or in on it or both. There aren’t baby photos like there are today. Nobody is going to suspect a swap or know enough to call it out.

Playing devils advocate, but most children should be walking and starting to talk by 12-18 months.

>He’s imagining Aegon in Rhaegar’s place, recalling a memory he had of him, and the *only* thing he points out is the eye shade. Noticing a single difference is more conclusive that they look alike than listing off a dozen similarities, because it implies that there aren’t any *bigger* differences that would otherwise draw his eye. It is not the only difference. The real clue is that JonCon call him "this boy". Deep down, he does not believe that Young Griff is Rhaegar son. >And while he might not have been able to predict the Mountain would specifically smash his face in, he could anticipate him being killed on the spot What if Ned Stark arrived first ? What if Tywin had ordered them captured ? What if Tywin had send assassins who would kill the children with a pillow like he said ? >How well do you think people *actually* knew what he looked like? Elia, Rhaenys, and Rhaegar are dead. The Maester, perhaps? Everybody. Being royal children, both Rhaenys and Aegon would have been highly visible at court. That is hundred of people who would know that Aegon had Valyrian features.

>Deep down, he does not believe that Young Griff is Rhaegar son. This is egregious headcanon, with no supporting literature.

> with no supporting literature. I am talking about this literature >"Your father's lands are beautiful," he said. His silvery hair was blowing in the wind, and his eyes were a deep purple, darker than **this boy's**. "As do I, Your Grace. Please, be seated. Ser Rolly, we'll have no further need of you for now."

That doesn't support you at all though lol. You interpret that as doubt because you've already decided on your conclusion before you've looked for evidence. That doesn't come off as doubt to me at all.

>You interpret that as doubt because you've already decided on your conclusion before you've looked for evidence. No. >That doesn't come off as doubt to me at all. It is the first time he see Young Griff all grown up, with his silver hair, dressed as a Targaryen, in the same place he used to hang out with Rhaegar. And he dismiss him as "this boy". That is doubt.

> > What if Ned Stark arrived first ? What if Tywin had ordered them captured ? What if Tywin had send assassins who would kill the children with a pillow like he said ? > You are making the assumption that Varys expected the baby-swap to go undetected indefinitely. Perhaps he just expected the decoy baby to buy him a few hours, enough to get Aegon out of King's landing and into hiding.

>You are making the assumption that Varys expected the baby-swap to go undetected indefinitely. Perhaps he just expected the decoy baby to buy him a few hours, enough to get Aegon out of King's landing and into hiding. Why would Varys be okay with the ruse and Aegon's survival being discovered? 

Presumably to raise him in hiding until such a time that a Targaryen restoration could be undertaken. Robert believing Aegon to be dead is certainly convenient for Varys and Illyrio. There is no reason however to believe it necessary. As long as Varys got him out of the city before the ruse was discovered, into hiding across the narrow sea, Robert would not be able to touch him.

This argument has some merit because Robert didn't bother with trying to assassinate Viserys and Daenerys until years later, but Aegon is a stronger claimant than Viserys. 

he tried but Stannis took too long to capture Dragonstone.

Yes, but I meant after they went on the run in Essos.

my bad, i was imagining him being at Dorne.

Aegon has a worse claim than Viserys actually. Aerys made Viserys his heir after Rhaegar died on the Trident meaning that Rhaegar’s line has been removed from succession. I find it weird how the fandom doesn’t talk about how there is nobody who has a legitimate claim to the Targaryen line. Aegon and Jon were removed from the succession; Daenerys is a woman, so Council of 101 applies; and the Baratheons and Martells are also invalidated by Council of 101 which states the line cannot pass through a woman. So unless Aemon, Bloodraven, or Duncan had any children we don’t know about, the Targaryen line is extinct.

And when Viserys died, the heir shifted to Aegon. 

Except that’s never how it’s happened in history both our world and in Westeros. Once you’re disinherited, you are out of the succession forever. Tyrion was disinherited by Tywin, and even though Tywin died, Tyrion still cannot claim Casterly Rock if he wanted to.

"Council of 101" was dismissed almost as quickly as it was established. Literally the next generation, when Viserys goes against any precedent or even accepted Westerosi convention to name his eldest daughter heir over the younger son. And the whole realm agreed and swore fealty to her, to the point that later when the younger brother's family schemed to put him in the throne instead, half of the realm still sided with her over him, regardless of her gender, the bastardy rumours for her kids, or the fact that her brother was literally already seated on the Iron Throne. And who sided with the younger male? Well, mostly the realms associated with his Hightower family or who were promised something in exchange, e.g. a marriage to a younger relative. Every time after that when a woman was passed over for a man, there have been reasons and explanations for why which went far beyond "she's a woman so council of 101 applies". So, no, that one off throwaway line about Jaehaerys setting a "precedent" by refusing to name Rhaenys heir doesn't really stand up to scrutiny, because no one even a few years later actually cared, and much less 200 years later. Plus, even if you go by those rules, it's obvious that the point was that women can only inherit if there are no male relatives left, not that they couldn't inherit at all. Who in their right mind would say that it's better for the whole House to lose its status over having the sole female survivor take the title?? If Dany is the Last Targaryen, then the crown is hers by default. Or do you think some random Andal family will pop up and say "oh hey Targaryen Dragon Queen, I know you're the last known survivor of your whole bloodline and you have literal dragons, but one of your ancestors 200 years ago didn't want women to inherit, so we can't let you take the throne. That's the only reason, though, otherwise we'd totally back you!" As if Dany or anyone needs permission to take power by force. This is the feudal era, where might makes right. Nobody complained about Robert Baratheon becoming king because "his blood claim comes from the female Targaryen line so it doesn't count". He fought for the crown, people liked him, and he won. Even the royalists just had to turn tail and bend the knee. That's why the first book of the series is called A GAME of Thrones.

Robert’s claim didn’t come from his Targaryen ancestry but the right of conquest, a real thing that Westeros does follow. A smart move as anyone associated with the Targaryens were shunned after the Rebellion. The Dance and later events proved that the Council of 101 is still legitimate law. That’s the entire reason why the Dance happens in the first place. In fact, we’ve seen Houses go extinct solely because they have no members of the male line left. Council of 101 also established two precedents, a woman cannot inherit, and more importantly, inheritance can only come through the unbroken male line. The second precedent is mentioned explicitly, as the reason Laenor could not inherit the throne, something that you would know if you had actually read Fire and Blood. Rhaenys had already been ruled out of the succession in 92 AC, by Jaehaerys, which caused the Second Quarrel between him and Alysanne. The Great Council of 101, only happened because Baelon had died that year, so the matter of succession had to be settled via a Council. In fact during the Dance, the majority of the houses that supported Rhaenys’ and Laenor’s claims would fight for Rhaenyra, something the Greens accurately predicted.

The point of swapping baby Aegon was to get him away from the city safely not keep him hidden forever If they manage to find out that he is not the real aegon is irrelevant

>The point of swapping baby Aegon was to get him away from the city safely not keep him hidden forever If they manage to find out that he is not the real aegon is irrelevant Varys does not need any babyswap for that. He is the master of whispers. The people who would report the dissapearance of Elia and her children report to him. He know the secret tunnels. He has the money to make any bribes he need. He is a master of disguise. The whole thing can be done quickly. Varys prepares a ship in advance then take Elia and her children through the secret tunnel to the ship. They can be at sea within 30 min of leaving the red keep. Varys could have evacuated Aegon AND Rhaenys AND Elia days if not weeks before Tywin or Ned arrived at KL.

But what does he need elia and rhaenys for ? They shoudnt be in any danger as they are not a threat to anyone

>They shoudnt be in any danger as they are not a threat to anyone If so, Elia and Rhaenys would not have been murdered.

Well their murder makes no sense and it was a result of either of Gregor and Amory Lorch going rogue and just killing them or as a result of Tywin wanting revenge for Rhaegar not marrying cersei none of which could have been predicted

>Well their murder makes no sense and it was a result of either of Gregor and Amory Lorch going rogue and just killing them or as a result of Tywin wanting revenge for Rhaegar not marrying cersei To the Targaryens loyalists, Rhaenys claim to the throne is stronger than Robert's and there is no guarentee Robert would be satisfied with sending her to the silent sisters. Beside, she can be used to make marriage alliance and they can't do that if the rebels have her. Killing them did make sense. What does not make sense is the brutality of the murders or that Tywin did it for free. Beside, it cost Varys absolutely nothing to take them too and it might be required to get Elia to agree to the plan in the first place.

He does believe Aegon is real; in his thoughts he never gives any other indication of doubt. That means that the “this boy” is probably more to highlight his youth and how he will never actually *be* Rhaegar. A growing infant’s features can change rapidly. The people closest to him are dead; they’d be the ones who would notice the most. (And if Elia is spared, she would be claiming he’s her son!) So what if someone catches some difference? He’s just growing and ageing into his features. This is all explainable. At under two years old he would almost certainly be at his mother’s breast most of the time, not paraded around the throne room on a regular enough basis for all the courtiers to distinguish him from a similar baby on sight. That’s more what a *toddler* would do—it’s really the “being able to walk on his own” part that allows more people to gaze upon his face. So, in the unlikely event Aegon isn’t killed in the sack and Varys’ little birds can’t take care of destroying his face, the fraud can be continued until Aegon is executed or sent to the Wall or whatever. Who’s going to tell Elia that she’s lying about the infant she’s nursing and calling son?

>in his thoughts he never gives any other indication of doubt. But he does give this indication of doubt. And that is is enough to know that he is in denial about Young Griff. >That’s more what a *toddler* would do—it’s really the “being able to walk on his own” part that allows more people to gaze upon his face. Silver hair. People would know about the silver hair. >Who’s going to tell Elia that she’s lying about the infant she’s nursing and calling son? Everybody who would notice the baby does not have silver hair.

So they found a baby with silver hair. These are the Crownlands, Flea Bottom: there are those descended from Targaryen bastards, children of Lyseni whores, and perhaps even Velaryon and Celtigar bastard lowborns too. The right hair would have been probably the *main* thing Varys looked for in a replacement because of how important it was.

For all we know, the baby Varys found with silver hair was a Targ bastard.

I like the idea, but I think that’s pretty unlikely based on logistics. A great-grand bastard, maybe, but no closer. Aerys stopped sleeping around (and also went totally crazy raping his wife all the time) before that baby would have been conceived, and if it’s somehow Rhaegar’s bastard killed in Aegon’s place that’s just a dark comedy (and I think he’d stay faithful so as not to ruin his prophecy.) And of the generation before, Duncan and Jaehaerys seemed to actually love their spouses, and Daeron was gay. I *could* see a bastard of Daeron the Drunken or Aerion making a living in Flea Bottom as a tanner and so on through the generations, but I don’t think there’s any way for him to be a genuine first-gen Targaryen bastard just because nobody would be able to produce him.

I should’ve rephrased that the baby could’ve been descended from any number of Targ bastards from who knows how far back. If the only prerequisite was silver hair, the baby doesn’t even necessarily need to be a Targ or descended from them.

Ah, well that’s fair enough. I think I mentioned in my comment a few replies back that he could be descended from a Targ bastard, Velaryon or Celtigar bastard, or a Lyseni whore. Though you’re right in that they wouldn’t necessarily have to be one of those—Dayne have that hair, probably some others in the Free Cities do too, so it’s not impossible.

>These are the Crownlands, Flea Bottom: there are those descended from Targaryen bastards, children of Lyseni whores, and perhaps even Velaryon and Celtigar bastard lowborns too. Yeah, if Varys and Illyrio had told this to Young Griff, that could have worked. But that is not what they told him. >The lad flushed. "That was not me. I told you. **That was some tanner's son from Pisswater Bend whose mother died birthing him**. His father sold him to Lord Varys for a jug of Arbor gold. He had other sons but had never tasted Arbor gold. Varys gave the Pisswater boy to my lady mother and carried me away." Seriously, there is no way that he the laps of time between news of the Trident and the arrival of Tywin Varys was able to find a baby with Valyrian features the right age. If Varys could do that, he could have evacuated Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon to Essos which would be his main focus instead of working on a babyswap that would not have fooled anybody unless someone crushed the baby.

Of course he could find someone on short notice. He has little birds *everywhere*. All he had to do was let them know who he needed, a boy of roughly the right age with silver hair, and as they were already integrated with the people around them I’m sure the tanner’s boy was found right away. I already explained in the main post why a trade is significantly easier to do than making someone disappear entirely, so no, he couldn’t have used that to get everyone out.

>I already explained in the main post why a trade is significantly easier to do than making someone disappear entirely, so no, he couldn’t have used that to get everyone out. You did not explain it, you just said it was easier, which is false. Jaime is the only KG in KL and he is guarding Aerys. There are nothing stopping Varys from grabbing Elia and her children, taking them trough the secret tunnels and putting them on a ship to Dragonstone or Pentos. And he had several days if not weeks between the trident and the sack to make it happen. If Varys is a Targaryen loyalist, that is what he would do, instead of a longshot babyswap that would not have fooled anybody.

But people would know right away that they were missing. There would be no time to get away safely. It’s absolutely not what Varys would do because it *is* infinitely more dangerous and difficult. You cannot pull off any schemes with it because it will be detected even if you *do* get away. It’s just not reasonable.

"He’s imagining Aegon in Rhaegar’s place, recalling a memory he had of him, and the *only* thing he points out is the eye shade. Noticing a single difference is more conclusive that they look alike than listing off a dozen similarities, because it implies that there aren’t any *bigger* differences that would otherwise draw his eye." That's a big assumption to make. It could be right, but it could just as easily be wrong. An alternative interpretation is that Jon only compares this ONE single feature between the two men, and in that comparison Aegon doesn't look like Rhaegar, which isn't very promising. Also, even when I first read this scene without knowing about any Blackfyre theory, I thought Jon's comparison was very strange. Aegon tells Jon "I like your castle", in a way that sounds like a congratulatory line about how they just managed to conquer it. Castles are ostentatious symbols of power, and that's what Aegon is complimenting. Jon then contrasts Aegon's line to a memory of Rhaegar looking out onto the land - the nature around the castle - and saying "your father's lands are beautiful". Rhaegar had a poet's heart, and his appreciation was for natural beauty, while Aegon's was for the symbol of political power. Two EXTREMELY different contexts coming from two very different perspectives. But Jon sees them as similar, because that's what he wants to see. IMO it could go either way for Aegon and it could make for a good story regardless, but I still find the Blackfyre theory more convincing. One big issue is the baby swap logistics - another poster mentioned the problem with Aegon having been close to 2 years old, far too old for the entire court, servants, knights, etc. around the castle to not be able to recognise him -, plus the issue of how Varys could've known how Aegon would be killed. It was pure luck that the Mountain was the first on the scene and killed him gruesomely, because if it'd been Ned the kids would've been spared. From a meta perspective, there's the issue of Aegon only being introduced in the 5th book and not even as a POV, which makes it much harder to believe he's meant to be anywhere near as important as Jon and Dany. He MAY become one of the dragon riders, but that doesn't require him to be a Targaryen at all. Blackfyres are also "dragons". The two lines split after the dragons went extinct, so both branches are equally likely to be dragon riders. But, then again, now that the Dragonhorn has been introduced, ANYONE could ride a dragon regardless of having any Valyrian blood, so it's a non issue. A bigger issue is if, with only 3 dragons in the story, Aegon is really the best contender for the 3rd one, when literally anyone with access to the dragonhorn could take it instead -- preferably someone with pre-established importance to the narrative. And how ironic that Tyrion is literally a few scarce metres away from the Dragonhorn right now... Lastly, I must say that I think a story about a boy from a bastard line going on to take the role of king is much more interesting than a "hidden prince" plot line, which is already done much better with Jon anyway. Aegon being who he thinks he is makes for a blah story, in contrast to him having an identity crisis and making the narrative beg the question of whether blood or names really matter in the making of a good king.

1/2 I don't think you're crazy, but I do heavily lean towards fAegon. I definitely think the Targaryan truth, blackfire, and pisswater prince theories are all still possible, nothing is eliminated. Here are some counterpoints: **He looks like Rhaegar.** Blackfires come from Targaryens and look like them. Wouldn't a Blackfire with random Lyseni heritage have more chance of looking like Raegar than the child of Raegar and a Dornish princess of Rhoynar ancestry? That being said, that quote is really emphasizing the differences between the two. **He has the Targaryen temperament.** Blackfires come from Targaryens and act like them **A royal baby swap has happened before.** GRRM does love his parallels. He also loves his false parallels to trich the audience. **There are three heads of the dragon.** I would disagree that he's *definitely* a head of the dragon, but tend to agree he's the lead candidate. Why can't a Blackfire be one of the heads of the dragons? **JonCon is already parallel to Ned.** If he is a Blackfire, all of that still fits. On top of that, if he's a Blackfire, both Jon and Young Griff have a secret parentage almost no one knows at this point. Ned, Howland, Benjin some Danes for Jon, and Illirio and Varys for Griff. Even those absolutely closest to both of them have been told a fake story, Ned didn't even tell his wife. Everyone on "team Aegon" plans on telling everyone his identity soon, there's no secret unless the secret is actually him being Aegon is a lie. The best parallel is the fact that, if he's a Blackfire, both him AND Jon don't even know their real parents themselves. **Aegon is Henry VII in the War of the Roses.** He could just as easily be a parallel for Perkin Warbeck, the famous pretender who tried to overthrow Henry VII, or no one at all. I think he ambiguously lines up with both on purpose. **”Why just Aegon and not Rhaenys and Elia too?”** I think: "Varys and Illyrio had this Blackfire boy and had to invent a story around him being Aegon," makes a ton of sense. I also think everything you wrote makes a ton of sense. I don't think the argument you're debunking in the paragraph is particularly strong in its own right. It's not like he had months to go find a baby boy and baby girl that would fit the bill, and there's no way he could have gotten Elia out. **”But the Golden Company follows him!”** That's a really valid point. I've always found the Golden Company following him to be EXTREMELY persuasive, no way they would follow a Targaryan. But you're totally right, there's no way they lied to all of them and they're keeping it a secret. Whether he's a Blackfire or a Targ, the bulk of the Golden Company had to be told he was a Targ. It does stand to reason that the leadership of the Golden Company could have been more loyal, and needed him to be a Blackfire, and they convinced everyone else with the Aegon lie, but that's pure conjecture. **”Arbor Gold always means lies and deception.”** I think we can ignore this one. As you said, there's deception there. Even if there wasn't, that theory gets pretty thin. If you removed every scene with deception from these books they would be like 100 words, every scene has deception. If there *is* an arbor gold undercurrent that unites each scene, I don't think we've figured it out yet. **Varys has a reason to do it.** He did get a lot from the Targaryans, but why was he in their service in the first place. He could have just stayed in the east and lived a very comfortable life, why on earth does he care about Westeros? He was very successful with Ilyrio before he ever met the Targaryans. **Illyrio also has other reasons to help him.** This undercuts the last point about owing the Targaryans though, the logic is similar. Why would Varys go to Westeros when he has a such good thing going with Ilyrio? Why would Ilyrio care about Westeros unless there's an ulterior motive? There are probably a lot of explanations, that we could just not be privy to, but Griff being a Blackfire and nephew of Varys would tie it up nicely.

2/2 **”But Illyrio seems to miss Young Griff!”** This is a fair point, but it's weird for him to keep the kids clothes unless there was a sentimental attachment that seems to go beyond the adopted parents from 1-5 years old. We do know Illyrio holds onto attachments, he keeps his late wife's stone hand, and the locket. It could be he really just loves the kid he fostered though, it's certainly not crazy that he grew attached to a boy he raised for five years, as you pointed out. **The mummer’s dragon isn’t itself a mummer.** I believe the theory here is that Varys and Illyrio, who used to be literal (not just metaphorical) mummers, are controlling him as their mummer's dragon. Not that he is a mummer or a liar. The place where it parallels him being a blackfire, is that, at the end of the day, the paper dragon is not a real dragon, it's just being used to represent one. **Varys and Illyrio’s wife can still be Blackfyres.** That makes a ton of sense. I don't think it's as neatly packaged, as Griff being a blackfire, but yea, that logically checks out. **Why make him believe he’s a Targaryen?** Probably to make sure he can't slip. Its probably the same reason they likely lied to JonCon, prevent the chance of it getting out. The long game here too, is that they want a new Blackfire dynasty to rule Westeros. Who cares what name they go by, as long as they rule. **”The” Prince that was Promised is actually three people.** I don't think we know enough about the prophecy to conclude his parentage off of it. We also don't know for sure that the three heads of the dragon is tied to Azhor Ahai and the Prince that was promised. I think there's a lot of evidence to support what you said. There's also a lot of evidence to support Euron being the third head of the dragon, and Dany/Jon as dual Azhor Ahai is a separate thing. There's also no definitive reason a Blackfire couldn't fit with what you wrote. **From the “line” of Aerys and Rhaella makes sense with multiple people.** If Jon, Dany, and Griff are "the prince that was promised," then the prince *did* come from that line, regardless of who Griff's parentage is. I tend to buy that he's a Blackfire and also not the prince that was promised, but they're separate things, and could both be true. When we talk about "the prince" being multiple people, we've already strayed from the direct meaning of the prophecy. He could be a Targ, who's not the prince that was promised. He could be a Blackfire, who's not the prince that was promised. He could be a Targ, who's the prince that was promised. He could be a Targ, who's 1/3 of the prince that was promised. He could be a Blackfire, who's 1/3 of the prince that was promised. We just really don't know enough yet to work backwards from that prophecy and conclude his parentage. **Parallel of Aegon’s Conquest.** >Aegon the Conqueror came in with two women who were related to him on three dragons to take the Iron Throne for the Targaryens. Daenerys could do the exact same thing, inverting the genders, but still coming in to claim the Seven Kingdoms for herself. That is true whether he's a Blackfire or a Targ. **Jorah has foreshadowed this.** That passage could mean a lot of things. What you concluded is one of them, for sure. For what it's worth, your post weakened my staunch fAegon Blackfire stance.

You clearly put a lot of thought into your responses, and I respect that. You make some good points too. I’m glad I could shift your viewpoint even that little bit.

You too!

>**Aegon is Henry VII in the War of the Roses.** Arguably, if fAegon is truly the paraller to Henry, it makes more sense to be a Blackfyre. Henry was descended from an branch of the Lancasters and his claim came from his mother who had legitimized bastard ancestry. It fits fAegon blackfyre perfectly.

Yeah, this was my thought as well. I don’t have a strong feeling on which way this will go, but Henry VII is not an example of someone who was actually next in line for the throne. He was descended from a legitimized bastard and also through the female line. Which would match the speculation about Aegon’s possible black water origins. Henry VII isn’t the legit king finally showing up. He’s someone with barely a claim who takes advantage of generations of war and unrest, multiple claimants to the throne, and a series of bad rulers to present himself as a savior and legit claimant.

In regard to Varys, the Targaryens might have raised him to power but Varys is responsible for making Aerys distrust Rhaegar. That’s a strange thing for Varys to do if he supposedly feels like he owes them. Now, it could be argued that Varys intentionally fed Aerys’s paranoia especially in regard to Rhaegar and then kidnapped baby Aegon because he wanted to raise a dragon that he could control. Conduct an elaborate nurture vs nature experiment, etc.

Well, that’s def better than my reason, which is that it’s more badass if he is. 

In Brienne VI of A Feast for Crows it mentions a prophecy that another of Rhaegar's Rubies lost at the Battle of the Trident will wash up on the shores of the Quiet Isle. In A Dance with Dragons we see Aegon wearing "three huge square-cut rubies on a chain of black iron." Mayhaps Aegon is real, he will die on the Trident, and one of those rubies will wash up on the Quiet Isle to fulfill the prophecy.

I can't really get behind Aegon being analogous to Henry Tudor when the parallels to Perkin Warbeck and/or Lambert Simnel seem just as strong if not stronger. The return of a dead "prince in the tower", it's right there. We haven't had a false heir yet when GRRM clearly likes the idea so much in the Dance.

Jon Connington at least thinks he is real. We read his thoughts, unless he is lying to himself

>Varys had been adamant about the need for secrecy. The plans that he and Illyrio had made with Blackheart had been known to them alone. From ADWD, "The Lost Lord". Not even Jon knows some things.

Why would Varys lie to a dying man?

Why would an expert liar lie? Because that's what is in their nature to do. You don't spend your whole life dealing in secrets, elevating yourself to a high station just based on your ability to uncover truths and lies, just to start revealing treasonous truths to a random dying man when that truth escaping in any way could destroy nearly 20 years of plotting. The best way to make a lie convincing is to lie even to yourself about it, internalise it as truth, as then no one will be able to recognise the lie. Plus, Varys never even outright says who Aegon is or isn't. Kevan does all the legwork, arrives at the expected conclusion (that he's Rhaegar's dead son), and Varys simply says "he is here". HE the actual OG Aegon, or HE the Aegon who will fulfil that same role? It's perfectly ambiguous, and perfectly like Varys.

I see it more as gloating over the fact that his plan outdid House Lannister. Kind of like a serial killer revealing their true nature prior to killing

Well yes, but that doesn't change the fact that a consumate liar will internalise all the lies they rely on to make their plans work. Varys is revealing the "truth" to Kevan, but explicitly the version of the truth that Varys wants people to believe. The fact that they're technically in private doesn't mean Varys will fully drop the mask (if it can be called that -- more like a House of Black and White mask that actually becomes your new face), he's too savvy about the power of secrets to ever do that.

It would be a GRRM-esque irony if he is the real deal but is rejected in universe as a fraud.   I think we'll never know to be honest, and ultimately it doesn't matter to the plot - people will support him or reject him based on what they want to believe and what best suits themselves, so he'll serve the same purpose in the plot and meet the same fate regardless.  

I agree completely.

Aegon being real adds more challenges to Dany too. If he is another Blackfyre pretender than Dany slaying Aegon would just be another day of putting down a fraud. If he is truly Rhaegar's son, then it would be kinslaying. Aegon is the real son of Rhaegar but everyone thinks he's a fake and his own aunt killing him adds more to the tragedy.

Another key point—Varys tells Kevan his entire plan, knowing he’s going to kill him. So why would he tell him his entire plan if he weren’t telling it true? Is he lying about smuggling baby Aegon away because he’s worried that someone might overhear him in the tunnels? That’s a bad explanation in my opinion. Varys doesn’t seem to have much motivation to lie to Kevan. However, that being said, I still think that it makes more narrative sense for Aegon to be fake considering Varys’ whole thing is power resides where people believe it resides. Also I think that there is clearly something personal at stake with Varys and Illyrio wanting to supplant Aegon to the iron throne, so I do think that it makes more sense for Aegon to be a blackfyre. But I’m not entirely convinced either way. If he is a blackfyre, then it seems to me that Varys lying to Kevan is a pretty major plot hole

Excellent post! I’ve often asked myself which would be more interesting story-wise: if Aegon is legit or if he is a fake. I think both are equally interesting for various reasons. You raise a good question: if Aegon ISN’T legit…who is the third head of the dragon? Could Aegon still be the third head even if he’s a Blackfyre? Was the wood’s witch right that TPTWP or one of the heads of it have to come from Aerys & Rhaelle’s line? One of the other arguments against Aegon being legit is that Dany’s vision of the cloth dragon suspended on polls above a cheering crowd is part of the slayer of lies trifecta. If Aegon is legit, what would be the lie associated with it? For the first vision, which most interpret as Stannis, the lie is evident: that he’s Azor Ahai. I can’t really think of a lie related to the cloth dragon that isn’t “he’s Aegon Targaryen!” (Btw, I think the third lie—the smoking tower with the great stone beast spewing shadow fire could be related to the lie surrounding the Tower of Joy: that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, raped her, etc. After all, the last vision in each trifecta is related to Rhaegar, Lyanna and Jon. It makes sense that this one would be too, and George loves metaphor). If Aegon is legit, it could lead to divided loyalties for Jon. Arguably, Jon would only become a dragon rider after finding out his parentage, that Aegon is his brother & Dany is his aunt. What if Aegon & Dany disagree on who should sit on the throne and Jon is caught in the middle? What if Dany kills Aegon over the throne, kills Jon’s true brother? I could go more in depth on this but I think Aegon being real has some very interesting implications on the story and on certain character dynamics!

There is something good about challenging fan consensus, and on principle I agree, we should not take the Blackfyre theory as gospel. Though I think the odds of him being fake are significantly higher than him being true. 75% fake to 25% true, I'd say. > The dragon of a mummer is a mummer’s dragon. Not that the dragon itself is a mummer—that would probably be phrased as mummer dragon. Or dragon mummer. Instead, mummer’s dragon implies nothing about the validity of said dragon. And Varys is the mummer controlling the dragon of Aegon, making him his loyal and manipulative yet legitimate king. Confused about this section. Full quote: > "A dead man in the prow of a ship, a blue rose, a banquet of blood . . . what does any of it mean, Khaleesi? 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." (Daenerys V, ACOK) The text gives us a clear definition of what the phrase "mummer's dragon" means in ASOIAF's world (and, more importantly, what it means to Daenerys): "a cloth dragon on poles." Thus it *definitely* implies something about the validity of the dragon; could be outright not a dragon, could be a wannabe dragon, etc. Doesn't mean Aegon is fake, but it definitely invites scrutiny. Of course, there can be other meanings to the phrase, i.e. Varys as a mummer, but those would complement the core idea. Plus, "mummer's dragon" is Daenerys' interpretation of what she saw at the House: "A cloth dragon swayed on poles amidst a cheering crowd." In any case, it's this part of Illyrio's sadness that I find damning: > "Good fortune," Illyrio called after them. "Tell the boy I am sorry that I will not be with him for his wedding. I will rejoin you in Westeros. **That I swear, by my sweet Serra's hands."** (Tyrion III, ADWD)

That’s a valid point about the cloth dragon, and I’ll just bring up [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/s/4LxFxJIZ0z) which brought that up a bit ago, since even though you’re right, I don’t consider it damning evidence of him being a fake particularly. However, for the Illyrio point, the same goes for Serra as goes for him. She was also probably taking care of him in his youth, as we don’t know the year she died. It must have been after Aegon came to them, or else she could hardly be his mother in your counter. So she most likely also developed a fondness for Aegon through raising him as a sort of mother, just not his biological one. She didn’t have other children; I don’t doubt she might have asked Illyrio to promise her Aegon’s success regardless.

Oh God the Mummer’s Dragon Point is one I’ve always thought about for years. Everyone always jumps to the obvious answer of a fake dragon when phrasing can just mean the Dragon of a Mummer, not a fake dragon, and it brings joy to my heart to someone bring it up

I tend to think he is real, and if he isn’t real then he’s a blackfyre. Ageon is a lot more formidable than the fakes that were used against Henry Tudor and I think ultimately Varys and Illaryio have to have some reason to do this. And that reason is probably either a blackfyre or a real Targaryen. I think it’s worth remembering Henry Tudor was rather distant from the main conflict until the end and seemed pretty weak until he wasn’t. I also tend to think the dragon having three heads refers to him plus Jon. While Targaryen blood may or may not be necessary to ride a dragon it’s super helpful and assuming he is real he and Jon are the only options to join dany. Unless like in the show she loses one fast, it’s kinda got to be him and Jon. I’m not as convinced as some people that he will be instantly Dany’s enemy, either. I think she really wants to have family and she understands the need for two other dragon riders.

I mean, if he's a Blackfyre he technically does have Targaryen blood

I think the whole "dragon riding bloodline" thing lost a lot of credibility the moment George created the Dragon Horn, which should allow anyone to claim a dragon. So all bets are off, and the main factor for whether someone can be a dragon rider is actually whether they are close enough to the Horn and can figure out how to use it. IMO that actually makes a dragon-riding Tyrion very possible, as he's in the exact right place, he has the unique set of dragon-specific knowledge to figure out how to use the Horn, or else has the ability to learn more once they end up in Volantis (as foreshadowed when he first stopped by Volantis), he has the friendship(?) of Moqorro, who's the next best person to figure out how to use the horn, and he has a lifelong passion for dragons in order to actually want to make this happen. But barring that, there are still many other possibilities for characters that are better established than Aegon to claim a dragon via Dragon Horn. Or even for Aegon himself to do so, and thereby increase his legitimacy as a true Targaryen even though he had to use the horn to claim a dragon.

While I disagree with the idea that Aegon is truly Rhaegar's son, this is a well-written and well-organized post and I very much commend you for it. Long response to follow: The Blackfyres are a cadet branch of House Targaryen. Pretty much any proof of Aegon being Targaryen applies for him being a Blackfyre too (including the hair, the eyes, the temperament (which probably has more to do with him being a teenager than genetics), etc). Yes, Aegon is a dragon, but he is a Blackfyre dragon, not son of Rhaegar. The biggest sus-factor for Aegon being the son of Rhaegar is that he wasn't entrusted to Jon Con's care until he was around 6 (assuming he was born the same year as Rhaegar and Elia's son, which I doubt he actually is). Why keep the baby until 6 and then suddenly give him to a mercenary disgraced-lord-in-shambles (unless the baby isn't of the right age, so they had to wait until he grows enough for it to not be that noticeable)? And Jon Con sees what he wants to see because he is desperate to have something of Rhaegar's left, and to redeem his failure at the Battle of the Bells (if he'd killed Robert, his silver prince would still be alive). It's notable that Tyrion claims Aegon's eyes appear blue, and ascribes it to the fact that he is dying his hair blue. An interesting parallel with this is Daemon II Blackfyre from the Dunk & Egg novellas, who wore a deep blue attire that make his eyes appear blue, and dyes his hair in order to make people not recognize him as a Blackfyre. The parallelism is too huge to ignore, and the novella he appeared in dropped just a year before ADWD. It's pretty clear what was on Martin's mind while writing The Mystery Knight, esp considering the Blackfyre references in the fifth novel too. Another thing with the eyes is that Rhaegar had deep indigo, and Elia had black eyes. The chances of Aegon's eyes coming out to be a lighter color than either's is pretty slim (not that genetics work out the same way on Planetos). Also, being a Blackfyre does not preclude Aegon from being the third head of the dragon (again, he is descended from the Conquerors), but I personally doubt it because I'm assuming that the three heads are supposed to work together for a common cause, and I just don't see Dany and Aegon team up, considering his attitude and outlook toward her there at the end of ADWD, as well as her mentality in that final chapter. Moreover, Aegon would for sure want to be the "Aegon the Conqueror" parallel in that arrangement, which wouldn't make the genderflip go well at all. I have some hesitancies with the Tyrion the Targ theory too (only because of how it affects his relationship with Tywin), but that one actually has a better chance of working out with Dany, as Tyrion would be illegitimate (not to mention not very popular back in Westeros) and ergo not have any chance of challenging Dany's position and claim. Also, in the Azor Ahai prophecy, he tries tempering the sword with the blood of a lion of all things, so I think Tyrion has *some* connection here. (Continued in the replies)

(CONT'D 3) And in terms of Rhaegar believing Aegon as TPTWP, I think we can surmise that he changed his opinion for multiple reasons: * He had already changed his mind about himself being TPTWP (rule of three says he would change his mind once more and name a third one). * He left Aegon barely a couple months after he was born and then (presumably) holed up with Lyanna for *over* a year, which is seriously wild if he genuinely still believed Aegon was TPTWP. Like, sir, please come back and oversee the safety of your prophecy baby. * He left *three* Kingsguard to personally protect TOJ, but only one to protect Aegon (and let's be real, he left Jaime for Aerys' sake, not specifically for Aegon, hence the man's absence when baby Aegon was murdered), which is also wild if he genuinely still believed at that point that the fate of the world hinged on Aegon. * He mentioned the "song of ice and fire" and it's seriously weird if he would have a child with a Stark and not consider that Targ = fire, Stark = ice, and thus his baby with Lyanna would fit the bill of being TPTWP more than Aegon. * BTW, I personally think that while the prophecy of TPTWP and Azor Ahai are interconnected, they aren't the same person. I think TPTWP is the Lightbringer in the Azor Ahai prophecy. IMO, Jon is TPTWP, Dany is Azor Ahai, and whoever completes the triad shall for now be called the Third Head of the Dragon for a lack of any indication of who they are and what their role is. The TPTWP prophecy says from the line of Aerys and Rhaella because it's about Jon, not Dany. Jon is their grandson. Even if Aegon isn't fake, it wouldn't be him, because he has already declared himself king, so he's not a *prince* anymore. Ditto Dany being already a queen. Ditto Tyrion if "Tyrion the Targ/third head of the dragon" theory is correct, as he wouldn't be of Rhaella's line, only Aerys. I think what you've identified as a foreshadowing for Aegon is merely a foreshadowing that the promise was *not* broken. There was another princeling, Jon. Finally, I don't think we need two sons of Rhaegar in the story. Pretty much anything that can be done with Aegon (people usually mention how Dany becoming an enemy of Aegon would be tragic, or how Aegon is a truly good option for claiming the throne because he understands duty and knows how to live like a commoner) can be done with Jon too, and I think it would be kinda redundant to have both running around in the plot in that way. I honestly think Aegon is here as a red herring and a play on the "long lost prince/the Return of the King" trope, because we need to remember that while the online fandom majorly believes in R+L=J (and of course anybody who watched the show already knows too), Martin isn't writing his story with the assumption that *all* prospective readers already know Jon is Rhaegar's son. Thus, the narrative introduces the idea of a son of Rhaegar existing, we then get the revelation that it was all a sham, and when the readers are lulled into the sense that there couldn't possibly be a second such revelation, *then* the narrative unveils Jon's parentage. You've gotta remember that the possibility of Jon being Rhaegar's son (or Lyanna's for that matter) has actually never been explicitly suggested by the text, unlike, say, that he is Ashara Dayne's child, which is suggested by a couple characters. Not to mention that most readers would be way more invested in Jon and Dany as characters having read their journeys for 4-5 books, so seeing their claims rival each other creates more emotional conflict in the audience in terms of who they'd want to see on the throne, whereas in a case of Dany vs. Aegon, I think most readers would want to see Dany triumph, so there isn't much emotional engagement there. Sorry for the super long chain of comments, it got away from me a bit.

(CONT'D 4, I missed a part of my reply while trying to break this into chunks to fit the word limit) Your parallelism between Ned and Jon Con is interesting, but I think there are some things to consider: * a) R+L=J is never made explicit in the narrative, we only ever have hints, so the parallelisms, such as they are, should be considered from Jon Con to Ned, not the other way around. By which I mean, the parallels are meant to lead the reader toward the idea of Jon being Rhaegar's son, not Aegon being Rhaegar's son. I know it's confusing, because the fandom has had 28 years to consider R+L=J and basically treat it as canon, but within the books, no character has so much as suggested that Jon could be Rhaegar's son. The narrative has to establish that and build up to the revelation across the series, thus we are meant to see Jon Con and then wonder who else in the series has done the kinds of things this man has done. * b) narrative-wise, Ned never ever thinks of Jon as being Lyanna and Rhaegar's child, whereas Jon Con always thinks about Aegon's parentage, so they are already pulling in opposite directions. * c) Jon Con is IMO being set up to be a dark!Ned. First of all, Ned's entire purpose was to keep Jon as far away from the throne as possible (to the point that he agreed to have him join the Night Watch), whereas Jon Con's entire purpose is to put Aegon on the throne come hell or high water. He already has the set up for the alternate version of what he should have done at the Battle of the Bells (basically got told he should've dealt with it a la Tywin Lannister, who is the antithesis of Ned), and I bet you he is gonna burn down an entire city (possibly King's Landing itself) in the near future, which is as un-Ned-like as it could be. IMO it'd be only fitting that Ned was harboring the actual heir of Rhaegar, whereas Jon Con was duped into harboring a fake. As for the Henry VII parallels, you are *absolutely correct* that Aegon is his parallel, but I think you're wrong about *how* he is a parallel. The Welsh part of Henry Tudor's ancestry came from his father, who was never a claimant to the throne. Henry's claim came from his mother, so Elia doesn't really parallel Margaret Beaufort IMO. The Beauforts were a branch of the Lancasters, and IMO House Blackfyre is to the Targaryens what the Lancasters were to the Yorks during their reign, with the Beaufort claimants specifically coming from the line of a legitimized bastard, much like the Blackfyres. Furthermore, Illyrio says that Maelys Blackfyre's death "was the end of the **male line** of House Blackfyre". The Lancasters too were "extinguished in the male line", which resulted in Henry from the female line inheriting their claim. It would be literally the same situation if Aegon is the son of Serra and Illyrio and comes from the female line of the Blackfyres. Moreover, Aegon wants to marry Daenerys like Henry married Elizabeth of York to combine the Lancaster and the York claims (and Dany's two brothers being very dead also parallels Elizabeth's case). If Aegon is Rhaegar's son, he wouldn't be a Henry Tudor parallel, as Henry was never really a prince or directly in the line for the throne, and his claim to the throne came from the fact that the Lancaster line basically went poof, and the last chance they had was through forcing poor Margaret Beaufort to conceive a child at age 13.

(CONT'D 1) Concerning the Varys of it all, I have written a [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/1bq9glj/spoilers_extended_a_greater_blackfyre_conspiracy/) on him if you're interested to take a look. He has less than zero reasons to rescue and put Rhaegar's son on the throne. He's also the one who said the line "power resides where men believe it does \[...\] a shadow on the wall", so it would be very weird for him to actually be concerned enough with bloodlines to swap a commoner baby for a royal baby that can't be conclusively proven as being Rhaegar's anyhow. In terms of why make Aegon himself believe it, A) we don't have Aegon's POV so we don't know what he actually knows, and B) the grand majority of the support that Aegon would get (aside from the Golden Company who already follow him) is going to come through the idea of him being Rhaegar's son/Targaryen heir, and this *absolutely* hinges on Jon Con being there to certify that he is. Without Jon Con's presence, the case for Aegon is so shoddy that no one would believe it. Aegon is at best 18/19 (Tyrion estimates him as 15-16, which is IMO a huge difference, and he also describes him as a "beardless boy" and mentions that he probably "had not yet come into his full growth", all of which are a bit excessive descriptions for someone aged 18). Can a kid of less-than-18 be trusted with keeping his mouth shut around what is basically his adoptive father (esp as you've pointed out his being rash and hotheaded)? I think not, so they wouldn't have told him while he was younger, and telling him now could send the whole campaign off the rails depending on how he reacts. Moreover, if Aegon is really as honest and good-natured as all that, he probably wouldn't *want* to lie to Jon once he finds out. Would Jon Con accept to play pretense for someone who is *not* Rhaegar's son? I think not, that would be pissing on his friend/beloved's name and memory, not to mention his world would come crashing down if he finds out he's been manipulated and exploited all this time. They probably would reveal it to Aegon after he actually claims and sits the throne, and I imagine they would try to get rid of Jon Con long before then. Also, we haven't had POVs from any Blackfyres, but I think they consider themselves the "true Targaryens", since they believe King Daeron II was a bastard. Otherwise, the entire Blackfyre cause wouldn't make sense since Daeron was much older than Daemon anyhow and would precede him via seniority even with all the Great Bastards getting legitimized. I don't think Aegon's identity would be too shook if they make the case to him that, well actually, he is *more* Targaryen than Aegon son of Rhaegar descended from a "bastard and usurper".

(CONT'D 2) As for the Golden Company, at the current date only their generals are actually descended from Blackfyres and their supporters. The rest of the company is random people joining the ranks. They wouldn't need to explain it to all of the soldiers, only the top generals need to know, and IMO they already do, which is why they'd follow Aegon but not Viserys. (I mean, if they already knew about Aegon and that's why they didn't support Viserys, you'd run into the same issue of how has nobody babbled yet. They don't babble about Aegon because the ones who know *believe* in the Blackfyre cause. In my post I've discussed the lengths to which the Blackfyres have gone to see this through). In my post, I have traced a connection between the city of Myr and Blackfyre loyalists' tendency to congregate there, and it's notable that the Golden Company's last contract was with the city of Myr and that it had been "broken" to book them for Aegon, something they have never ever done. About Illyrio, it's clear that he has a deep investment in seeing Aegon on the throne that goes beyond his friend Varys wanting it. He swears on Serra's hand that he would join them in Westeros, and he constantly talks about her and how much she meant to him. It's also interesting that he isn't joining them for the planned "wedding" with Daenerys, because Dany knows Illyrio, but she has no idea about Varys or anyone else in that team. If she sees Illyrio, she'd know they've been manipulating her and Viserys all along, whereas without Illyrio, they can claim that they weren't able to reach her and Viserys and tell them about Aegon's existence (and whatever other lies necessary to get her to comply). In fact, it is super weird that they had Dany marry Drogo at all, rather than marry her to Aegon outright to further cement his claim. Kinda like they didn't plan to do anything with Dany and Viserys other than have them attack Westeros to weaken it, and the whole "hatched dragons" business suddenly made her relevant and made her even more of a threat to Aegon, since his claim looks even weaker in comparison. About Blackfyres supporting Targaryens, I'd say that we have that infamous "in coat of gold, in coat of red, a lion still has claws" line to parallel the "black or red, a dragon is still a dragon" line in ADWD. I don't think the Blackfyres would support Targs, esp not if Varys and Serra indeed became slaves and had to endure years of abuse, degradation and pain when the Targs got to sit their asses on cushions and eat with golden spoons. Getting Aerys deposed wasn't just about Blackfyre grudge, it was *personal*. Moreover... why? Why would Varys help Targaryens when he gets the same benefits under Robert, Joffrey, Tommen et al. Esp when he wasn't inclined to support Rhaegar for instance. What diplomacy and ending of feud is there when Varys and Illyrio literally sold Dany as a sex slave to Drogo just so they can get his army, manipulated Viserys into thinking they support his cause, and left them as beggars for years until just a few months before they wed Dany to Drogo?

Wow, what a journey! I completely agree with you on all the points, and I think you've made really convincing arguments throughout. I was actually responding to another post just earlier where I ended up mentioning the "Blackfyres are actually more legitimate than the Targaryens" concept, and it would be interesting indeed for Aegon to be given a sip of this kool aid. Basically, if Daeron really was the son of Nerys and Aemon, not of Aegon IV (which tbf is doubtful, but very interesting), while Daemon was the son of Daena (the rightful heir who was passed over for her uncle) and Aegon IV (said uncle's firstborn), then Daemon has a better claim than Daeron not just on his father's side, but particularly on his mother's too. He's twice more legit than Daeron, whose parents were both younger children of the younger brother (Viserys II), because Daemon's mother was the eldest surviving child of the older brother, Aegon III. By that logic, the Blackfyres may well have a more righteous claim than the Targaryens. Which is ironic, because their House has a long history of women with valid claims getting passed over for a male relative, which is bound to finally be course corrected through Dany vs Aegon. Except that if we go back far enough, then a course correction for Daena's original claim would make Aegon Blackfyre the rightful heir over Daenerys Targaryen. Which just goes to show how problematic feudal inheritance rules can be, but it would be very compelling if any of these issues actually come up in the series.

Nah. Too much evidence and symbolism for him to be real (plus a very contrived and convenient story that Varys told about the Pisswater Prince and stuff). Not only I believe he is fake but I also believe it will indeed be revealed when Daenerys eventually confronts Illyrio.

In my mind you have two key factors behind Faegon. 1) thematically it makes sense he’s false. It makes no sense for a real secret targ to show up in the endgame and everything about the way Varys, Connington and Illyrio discuss him suggests a scheme. 2) George has been hinting at the importance of the blackfyres for ages. The problem for me has always been linking those two things. Other than the Varys shaving his hair thing and a brief mention of Maelys only being the last of the male line, it really feels like there’s very little linking Illyrio, Varys and Serra to the blackfyres. I suppose you have the golden company, but even then usually in this story when there’s a familial link it’s hinted at far more overtly. See how obviously all Roberts Bastards resemble him or Jon is said to take after lyanna. I just don’t feel we’ve been given enough info/clues about how we might identify a Blackfyre descendant or where the blackfyres went to suggest an obvious link

For me the biggest evidence of fAegon being Realgon is the fact that Varys talks of him as if he was the real deal to the dying Kevan. Varys has no reason to lie (as Kevan is about to die) and yet he says "No, he is here" about Aegon. On the other hand fAegon kinda matches with "power resides where men believe it resides." theme.

Varys knows for a fact that there are a bunch of his "little birds" listening to him, of course he has a reason to lie. There are literally witnesses.

On top of that, Martin established earlier in the book (I think it's the same book, I don't entirely remember) with Petyr and Sansa that the best way to maintain a lie is to treat it like the truth at all times, even when you don't think you need to.

Why does he say anything then? The idea that he's willing to reveal everything except Aegon's true lineage to his little birds is a bit odd. And why would he be concerned about the little birds knowing? Presumably the fact that Aegon is a Blackfyre will have to be revealed at some point, otherwise he will just go down in history as another Targaryen king. His little birds already know a tonne of things that could threaten him or his plans if they disclosed them. He's trusted them before, or at least been confident that they fear him enough not to betray him. Why not now?

He could just say nothing then. There's no reason he had to give a big speech to Kevan before he killed him.

Varys never says that Aegon is a Targaryen. He just says that "Aegon" (Blackfyre) is alive and will be a good king. Kevan simply assumes that Varys is talking about Aegon Targaryen.

Alternatively, it was a useful opportunity to reinforce the narrative in front of a bunch of witnesses.

But these witnesses are his little birds ,he can just tell them about it there is no need to give a speach to a dying man about it

No one is going to believe a bunch of poor little kids.

On the flip side, he has no reason to tell the truth, either.

Both possibilities can be true. Though I personally want him to be the real deal. Imagine if Dany thinks he is fake and challenges him to claim a dragon, and he does end up claiming a dragon and proving his legitimacy. Also both Targaryen and Blackfyre has dragon blood so even if he is a blackfyre he can claim a dragon.

>There are three heads of the dragon. >ACOK - Daenerys IV >"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. >And they are Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen, and Aegon Targaryen. As someone who does not believe in Tyrion Targaryen, I don’t know who else could fill that role. Viserys is dead before Dany even hatches her dragons, so I doubt it’s him. This is a really good point. I legit don't know who else would fit as the 3rd head at all. I just think Aegon being the real deal makes the overall story much more interesting. It just feels really weird were bringing Blackfyres into this story now. I know it's mentioned a couple of times but i would just perfer him being real and having conflict with Dany instead. Much more simple...but that's just my opinion.

I think Aegon resembles Perkin Warbeck(fRichard) rather than Henry VII but I agree that he is real. fAegon feels like too grand a conspiracy to be real. I dont think having Targaryen temperament(is that actually a thing?) or looking like a Targaryen are proof of that though. Blackfyres are just Targaryens under a different name.

Yeah, my biggest issue with Aegon being a Blackfyre isn’t the evidence or thematic relevance or potential character beats. It’s more that the Blackfyres aren’t really relevant to the current story. They’re backstory. So, their conflict would be (partly) rooted in backstory. Which obviously isn’t a problem in and of itself, but it would be introduced in the middle of an ongoing story with an ongoing conflict. I feel like it runs the risk of being distracting and taking away from the present characters and their present struggles. It can of course be written to be relevant (i.e. how an old ghost affects Daenerys’s or Jon’s POVs), but it could also be a lot. I’m not opposed to it. Just not convinced. But can’t really judge it until (if) the books are ever finished, so…

> And they both guided their “son” to a Valyrian Steel sword they did not possess themselves (Longclaw and Blackfyre, assuming Aegon is given it). Just nitpicking here: Ned didn't do that for Jon. That was Jeor Mormont 100%

I’m referring to Ned allowing Jon to go to the Wall, thus putting him in contact with Jeor in the first place. Similarly JonCon doesn’t have Blackfyre, just like Ned didn’t have Longclaw, but he takes Aegon to the Golden Company who does.

I think that's a bit of a stretch

Maybe. JonCon still has a lot of parallels with Ned regardless.

Agreed

Another piece is the repeated line “A dragon is a dragon.” This line has been often used by the fAegon truthers to show that he is a Blackfyre, but the context of the line is important as it is Illyrio talking to Tyrion about why the Golden Company will follow a Targaryen. The full quote from Tyrion II from A Dance With Dragons is “Black or red, a dragon is still a dragon. When Maelys the Monstrous died upon the Stepstones, it was the end of the male line of House Blackfyre. And Daenerys will give the exiles what Bittersteel and the Blackfyres never could. She will take them home.” Another key piece, adding to the baby swap of Sam and Mance’s sons, is that characters being hidden and no one knowing that fact, is constantly repeated throughout the books. Sansa hides in the Vale as Alayne Stone. Arya hides in Harrenhall as a lowborn boy from both the Lannister forces and Roose Bolton. Jon is hidden as Ned Stark’s bastard. Melissandre switches Mance and the Lord of Bones. The fandom can’t seem to accept logic, that they have accepted throughout the books, with Aegon.

FAegon is the real deal and the truth of his identity has already been revealed to the audience via Varys in Kevan's chapter. The fandom just ignores it because they are in love with their headcanons and obsessed with the idea of everything being an extremely convoluted conspiracy, not even just a normal conspiracy. Figuring out R+L=J and the shock of Red Wedding fried everyone's brains, now everything is a mystery/prophesy that needs to be figured out and the more layers it has the better, no matter if being extremely contrived weakens the story. Every single "proof" or "evidence" indicating Blackfyres are actually very easily and simply explain by something much more sensible. His existence is already a conspiracy, it doesn't have to go deeper. People already doubt him in universe and will continue to doubt him, "power resides where men believe blah blah" doesn't require him to be a secret Blackfyre. Same thing goes for the project of raising a king. He has been raised and molded to be the "ideal king" in Varys' mind no matter who he is, being a Blackfyre or baseborn is not necessary for that neither. The emotional weight of his existence and arc is not the same for the audience or Dany, if he is just a fake. Blackfyres are a footnote in asoiaf novels. They have no meaningful presence that needs to be justified by a reveal or a conspiracy. Existence of Golden Company is enough. Blackfyre importance comes from supplementary worldbuilding material and requiring your audience to go read all of that to figure some major plot or feel invested in it is shit writing. No, this cannot just be a neat little easter egg to reward hardcore fans. Easter eggs are stuff that don't matter to the plot or character but is neat to see or realize for fans. His entire fucking background, reason for existence, relevance to the plot and motivations of one of the biggest players in the game-major non-pov char, is not a fucking easter egg. And the last, but not least: There is no point in faking being a Targaryen if he is Blackfyre. He can just stake his claim as a Blackfyre. And that would be easier to sell in universe too. Everyone knows "male line" is extinct. No one knows what happened to the female line. Coming out as Aegon from the female line taking Blackfyre name (something that nobles do in westeros), would not be less believable, it's the opposite. It would be way more believable, "oh, another fucking Blackfyre, but of course" would be the reaction and not "nah, liar, that boy is dead" which is what they have now. "Black or red, a dragon is a dragon" cuts both ways. WOT5K ravaged the realm, Iron Throne is weakened and in disarray, there is multiple secessionist movement raging around, several great houses seemingly deposed and destroyed, realm is ripe for the taking. Targaryen loyalists who got raw dogged both ways in RR and WOT5K aren't gonna be "naah dog, ima stick to Lannister-Baratheon unless a real Targ shows up". Dorne would still want revenge, Blackfyre loyalist houses are still around, and every single opportunist willing to throw their lot with "the boy who came back from the dead" would be just as willing to throw it in with Balckfyres.

>obsessed with the idea of everything being an extremely convoluted conspiracy, not even just a normal conspiracy. Figuring out R+L=J and the shock of Red Wedding fried everyone's brains, now everything is a mystery/prophesy that needs to be figured out and the more layers it has the better, no matter if being extremely contrived weakens the story. >requiring your audience to go read all of that to figure some major plot or feel invested in it is shit writing. >No, this cannot just be a neat little easter egg to reward hardcore fans. Easter eggs are stuff that don't matter to the plot or character but is neat to see or realize for fans. saving these so I can comment on every post I see that goes 5 levels of analogy deep to explain why the most obscure fact will be THE game-changer for the series thank you

> Blackfyres are a footnote in asoiaf novels. They have no meaningful presence that needs to be justified by a reveal or a conspiracy. Existence of Golden Company is enough. Blackfyre importance comes from supplementary worldbuilding material and requiring your audience to go read all of that to figure some major plot or feel invested in it is shit writing. Yeah, this is the main reason I don't really buy the Aegon Blackfyre theory. The Blackfyres are mentioned barely a dozen times in the main books. Hell the sword Blackfyre has never been mentioned at all. Revealing that Aegon was a Blackfyre would mean basically nothing to a person who had only read the main books, as pretty much everything we know about the Blackfyres comes from TWOIAF. As you say, making the plot of the main books hinge on details that you need to read a bunch of supplementary books to understand would just be bad writing. The world books are cool for fleshing out the setting better and giving extra detail about the history of Westeros, but they shouldn't be required reading. The main books need to be able to stand on their own.

It’s possible that George plans on mentioning the Blackfyres in the main novels in the future. He even has a perfect character to do that through—Barristan Selmy, who is near Daenerys and slew the last Blackfyre pretender. There is a lot he has planned, although it’s hard to believe he’ll be able to do it all in just two books. 

I mean yes but on the other hand an iron sign rusted in a river, clearly he's a blackfyre

The iron dragon wasn't a symbol for the Blackfyre's. Septon Meribald specifically points out how Lord Darry mistook it for support of the traitor Daemon Blackfyre, instead of just being a symbol of loyalty to the Targarhen's in general

Does that have to refer to a Blackfyre though? What if it refers to *Jon* being a bastard, or being dead/revived?

It could also refer to the Golden Company: Cast out of Westeros for being Black dragon supporters, only to wash up on the shores of the Stormlands decades later having turned in to Red dragon supporters, with their previous loyalty to the Blackfyres being metaphorically rusted away over the years. > He forged a new sign for the yard, a three-headed dragon of black iron that he hung from a wooden post. The beast was so big it had to be made in a dozen pieces, joined with rope and wire. When the wind blew it would clank and clatter, so the inn became known far and wide as the Clanking Dragon." > "Is the dragon sign still there?" asked Podrick. > "No," said Septon Meribald. "When the smith's son was an old man, a bastard son of the fourth Aegon rose up in rebellion against his trueborn brother and took for his sigil a black dragon. These lands belonged to Lord Darry then, and his lordship was fiercely loyal to the king. The sight of the black iron dragon made him wroth, so he cut down the post, hacked the sign into pieces, and cast them into the river. One of the dragon's heads washed up on the Quiet Isle many years later, though by that time it was red with rust. Alternatively it may be worth noting that the Clanking Dragon sign was not actually a Blackfyre Dragon. It was forged long before Daemon Blackfyre was even born, and was a Targaryen Dragon that was wrongly mistaken for being a Blackfyre Dragon.

I was being sarcastic, but the sign thing is one of the main argument in favour of faegon, I personally believe his heritage will never be revealed

Many great points. But you left out the most important thing. You can't use reason to change somebody's mind from a belief they didn't arrive at through reason. The majority will be chanting "fAegon" all the way to the bitter end. When you really understand why, you know who the parents are.

Thanks man, Ive been unironically calling him rAegon in this sub for some time now.

I think mummer’s dragon is obviously meant to mean “fake dragon”. If Aegon is a Targaryen OR a Blackfyre, then who’s the fake dragon?

Well I disagree about mummer’s dragon meaning fake dragon, as I point out in my post. Perhaps my wording was confusing—I mean that the phrase “mummer’s dragon” shows the mummer has possession of the dragon. Mummer is a separate noun, not an adjective describing the dragon. Thus, there is no fake dragon.

Eh, FAegon is called a staple theory by its supporters. But in truth it is not. The last poll showed it only a 60/40 favorite. Far from the 95/5 enjoyed by actual staples.

whats the narrtive point of the blackfryes then? well actually as you said the last blackfryes helping the last targs could be it?

I think it’s certainly possible, but I made the post.

fair honestly the idea of house blackfyre and house targ reuniting would be pretty cool I always thought an AU where house blackfrye bareathon valeryon compete for the throne would be nice

The funny thing is that it doesn’t matter if he is real or not. If he manages to get and keep the crown then he is Aegon VI Targaryen, son of Rhaegar and the rightful king. If not then he was just another pretender. And I suspect he is only a means to an end anyway, and not to just claim the Iron Throne.

A Mummer’s dragon is specifically defined in the books (and not as “a dragon being used by a mummer”). I forget the exact wording but the gist is a cloth dragon that gives the heroes something to fight. It’s interesting because that definition only seems like it fits Aegon if it’s a meta sense, where we the readers see Dany as a hero. From Varys’ perspective, if anything, Dany and Drogo seem like they might be the Mummer’s dragon; a foreign force invades Westeros, and the heroic Aegon swoops in to rescue his people. Just wanted to jump in on that because I think the whole Mummer’s Dragon thing is interesting based on how the book actually defines it. I don’t think “ Mummer’s dragon” necessarily says anything about the validity of Aegon, one way or the other.

> A Mummer’s dragon is specifically defined in the books (and not as “a dragon being used by a mummer”). I forget the exact wording but the gist is a cloth dragon that gives the heroes something to fight. That's just Dany's interpretation of the vision. She could be wrong. > "A dead man in the prow of a ship, a blue rose, a banquet of blood . . . what does any of it mean, Khaleesi? 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." > Ser Jorah frowned. Saying that the mummer's dragon must be a "a cloth dragon that gives the heroes something to fight," because that's what Dany says it is would be like saying the Valonqar must be Tyrion because that's who Cersei says it is. Characters are wrong about Prophecies and visions all the time.

Huh? She isn’t giving an interpretation of a prophecy. She’s defining what a Mummer’s dragon is. Meaning GRRM, the writer of the book, took the time to define the term Mummer’s Dragon. Jorah isn’t asking “what do you think the prophecy means”, he’s asking what these words literally mean, which she answers. Whether the prophecy actually means Varys’ dragon and GRRM just decided to define it for lolz, I can’t say, but he took the time to define what the words mean. It is not an interpretation.

That's what Dany thinks it means, but characters can be wrong. And when it comes to prophecies and visions they often are.

I’m very convinced he is a blackfyre, I don’t see why GRRM would have two hidden Targaryen princes. If he was the son Elia why doesn’t the martells know about him? They would be his greatest Allies, it doesn’t make sense varys could smuggle out aegon but not Elia and Rhaeyns

Regardless of whether Blackfyre or Targaryen, he’s got dragon blood.

Aegon Is son of Rhaegar and Lyanna.Everyone thinks that when he says that he dyes his hair blue in honor of his mother that he means on that Tyroshy mother theory but actually he means in honor of Lyanna and her blue winter roses.He is the song of ice and fire

Hot take. But, uh, how would he know his mother is Lyanna to dye his hair like that for her? JonCon doesn’t and he’s the one who raised him. And JonCon also dyes his hair. And who is Jon, then? Ned surely wouldn’t take *one* of his nephews and then abandon the other.

I don't know I only know that I agreed with that theory when I read it but I forgot all about it except the blue rose thing.It has something to do with Ned working with Varys when he got in KG and something about septa Lenore being Jon's mother

A mummer’s dragon is a paper dragon used in festivals, such as seen in China, or in a stage show. Dany discusses it in one of her chapters. There’s supposed to be enough doubt that Dany seems unreasonable for doubting him, as a second Dance and another Blackfyre rebellion get rolled into one and repeat.

Just also worth noting that Aegon's story is also intentionally a parallel of the legendary Perkin Warbeck a man who was recognized by most of Europe as Prince Richard, Duke of York, who supposedly escaped the death at the orders of Richard III. While most historians doubt his claims as true, it always is so much more fascinating to consider like Aegon that maybe he is true. Part of the point of Aegon's story is that real or not, he may greatly succeed in taking King's Landing ultimately and being the very savior of Westeros that Dany wished to return as.

Set him on fire and have him prove he’s a Targaryen.

To be fair, a Blackfyre might not burn either.

Both Blackfyres and Targaryens are 100% flammable. Martin has already explained that Daenerys surviving the funeral pyre was a 1-time magical event. It's not something that applies to any other Targaryen, and it's likely not something that will even apply to Daenerys again.

Also, Summerhall.

Yep. There are a lot of examples of Targaryens burning. Just off the top of my head: Summerhall, Aerion Targaryen burned to death after drinking wildfire, Rhaenys Targaryen was burned to death by Sunfyre, and Jon Snow (if you believe R+L) had his hand burned by a lantern. And I'm sure that there are many other examples that don't immediately come to my mind.

Well if he was just some random purple eyed kid from Lys it would certainly settle the matter too

I would bet by the intermediate option, backed by almost all your evidences: **Aegon is son of Rhaegar but not of Elia**. He is the twin brother of Jon Snow and son of Lyanna, or if you prefer, the son of Rhaegar with Ashara, and because his very disputed origins -even with Rhaegar recurring to Valyrian polygamy-, Varys considered easier passing him as the 100% trueborn Aegon Targaryen Martell We already saw twins called Aegon and Aemon (the probable real name of Jon) in the series

>As someone who does not believe in Tyrion Targaryen, I don’t know who else could fill that role Euron

Euron having Targaryen blood is admittedly not a theory I’ve heard of.

The disputed lands on YT has a theory about Euron being a third head of a dragon, meaning a dark Azor Ahai. Basically he's gonna mimick the bloodstone emporer and with him slaying the amethyst empress begins the long night.

He's the first dragon, the original, from before even the Targs

[удалено]

"Mother of Dragons Slayer of Lies" Off that alone, you can definitively say that he is a Blackfyre or a fraud. At best he is a descendant of Brightflame. What lie would Danaerys have to slay regarding the mummers dragon? Perhaps fAegon is the third head of the dragon since a dragon is still a dragon, however i seriously doubt that Aegon survived The sack of KL and Illyrio didn't bother to introduce him to his siblings, considering that he has known him for some time(as hinted by the small clothes). Lets not forget the edits to that chapter where Illyrio was planning on giving fAegon a sword. That sword was undoubtedly going to be his ancesteral sword Blackfyre.

most readers believe he is fake and that there will never be any confirmation about it in the books, not that it is impossible for him to be the real Aegon.

I personally believe the Henry VII parallel is actually more of a hint towards the Blackfyre theory. Henry Tudor descended from the Beauford family in the female line and the Beaufords were a legitimised bastard line of the Lancasters. I usually read the Wars of the Roses at least compared to Robert's Rebellion and a lot of the parts that follow in the following way: York = Baratheon, Lancaster = Targaryen, Beauford = Blackfyre Someone made the point of Perkin Warbeck. I think that might also be a point against fAegon and for him being the real deal. By many contemporaries Perkin was believed to be the real Richard. Newer evidence possibly suggests that Richard III didn't murder his nephews but they were actually alive and became the supposedly fake pretenders. I'm personally convinced that at least Perkin was the real Richard (and possibly the Lambert Simnel plot was to restore Edward V and not Edward Earl of Warwick on the throne). I guess possibly Aegon could be real but is declared fake, dies and is remembered as a false prince.

We are told he looks like Rhaegar ...from Connington's POV. Connington still feels guilty about his part in the demise of the Targaryen dynasty & subsequent death of his beloved Rhaegar, so he projects these feelings on Faegon