Who was the old man?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Might

Keep in mind alatar, that many of the new abilities that Saruman may have had were unknown to Gandalf.
Saruman was well learned in the lore of the rings and had forget a ring of power of his own, indeed of lesser power, but still - who knows what he could achieve with it?

Problem with that (you knew I would find one ) is, does any being have this power in Arda or in Middle Earth? A general trend in Tolkien's history is to go from the fantastic to the more normal that resembles much of our world today. Valar and Maiar and Elves retreat and leave humans and a stray hobbit or two. Silmarils give way to ordinary gems. The White Tree in Minas Tirith, though possibly a descendant of Telperion, is still just a tree.

What I am saying is that Saruman may make a new thing or two, but to create a completely new phenomenon never used before or afterwards? Unlikely, at least to me.

If he had indeed come close to the secret of the making of the Rings of Power, that shows his Ring wasn't that weak at all... so why not believe he could conjure up phantoms unknown to Gandalf.

Did any other ring give such a power?

Unfortunately no clear examples of him doing so are known or at least I recall none.

That never stops me...

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

My personal suspicion has always been that the "old man" was Saruman, whose mind was so bent on finding out precisely what had happened in that area that he unwittingly projected an image of himself -- his thought, since what he is in uttermost truth is a being of thought, not flesh -- to try to see who was around that campfire, and if any hobbits might be there (especially the Ringbearer). When they addressed him directly, he suddenly realized what he had done, "stepped back" and vanished. My own reasoning is that he is, after all, a Maia, and travel via thought is natural for him in his natural state, but bound to flesh as were all the Istari on this mission, he might be able to do it only in thought -- what might be perceived by others as a "phantom" state. Moreover, he is intensely interested in what happened here, as was indicated by the fact that he actually left the safety of Orthanc to do his own reconnaissance (and was almost caught by the angry Ents). That it was a "phantom" has, in my mind, been supported by Gimli's unease over the lack of footprints at the beginning of "The White Rider" chapter. Legolas dismisses it because of the springy grass, yet he himself says that Aragorn could read even a bent blade -- yet none are mentioned, if I recall correctly.

Under this rationale, it's also possible Gandalf "projected" his own thought as well, also unintentionally; this might be supported by the fact that the "phantom" wore a wide-brimmed hat, as is also how Gandalf is described when he first meets with the three hunters in Fangorn. Either could work, I think; I just lean toward Saruman because Gandalf seemed very certain that they had not seen him. But he could be wrong.

My brain feels rather knotted, now...

[alatar]

My concern is that the 'explanation' of the phantom menace violates Occam's Razor, meaning that it makes things even more complicated, when the simpler solution - that Saruman journeyed on foot or physically by some wizardly means - is available and supportable.

And note that Aragorn *could* read a bent blade, but does not make an attempt to do so. If Aragorn states that he cannot find a bent blade, then I would accept the phantom explanation more readily, but Aragorn does not examine any evidence for us to gnaw.

And Gandalf states that Saruman could appear however he wished via the power of his voice (methinks) and so how hard would it be to beguile three sleepy travelers?

And that's enough ands for now.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Lots of ands there, yup.

The only problem I have with the "beguiling sleepy travelers" notion is that the "phantom" never speaks. If the power of his voice is being used, then he had to add the "post-hypnotic suggestion" that they never heard him. And if that is the case, then why not just make them think he was never there at all?

A very odd little moment. Maybe it was an illusion sent by the Valar to remind let the hunters know they were soon to encounter someone unexpected. Nah, too many interference problems there, too. *sigh*

It could have just been an innocent traveller wondering at night, unconcerned by the appearance of the three hunters and minding his own business!

[Inziladun]

Mansun

It could have just been an innocent traveller wondering at night, unconcerned by the appearance of the three hunters and minding his own business!

I'm not going to discount it outright, but that's simply too coincidental for me. JRRT doesn't have a tendancy to make throwaway references in his books, and as I said earlier, the appearance of the old man there and then, yet having no importance to the story, just doesn't ring true to me.
I think Radagast is out of the question for the same reason. He had played a very minor role in the story to that point, and that early on, and there was simply no plausible excuse I can think of that would have brought him to that spot on ME at that time.
There has been some good discussion here about this. I always just believed it to be Saruman and never gave it much thought until now.
The point of the clothing descriptions between Saruman and Gandalf regarding hats and cloaks has been brought up. I don't see that as significant. UT makes mention in the chapter (I think, not having my copy handy) The Hunt for the Ring of Saruman being seen by Hobbits in the Shire and being mistaken for Gandalf. And as others have said, it shouldn't have been much of an effort for Saruman to change clothes.

[The Might]

Ah, alatar, now I understand what you meant. I thought you were asking whether Saruman was known to have had such power before or afterwards, but I see you meant it generally as in the history of M-e. In which case of course there had been others who deeply knowledged in the dark arts used them to conjure up "phantoms".

Take the Barrow-wights raised by the Lord of the Nazgul as a best example not to mention the deeds of Sauron during the First Age.

Actually, the phantom could well fit the characteristics of a wraith as described elsewhere by Tolkien, clad in this case like Saruman and not with some dark cloaks like the Nazgul.

What I am saying with all this is yes, there was a precedent so there is no reason to think that it was no longer possible - the Witch-king had done it like what, a couple of months before?

And you also bring up Occam's razor, something I would rather object to. Why? If we were all judging by this priciple probably a lot of the threads on the forum including this one would not have existed. I would have believed it was Saruman and not questioned it.

And even so, Occam's razor does not necessarily mean that the simplest answer is the right one:

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood. This is, however, incorrect. Occam's razor is not concerned with the simplicity or complexity of a good explanation as such, it only demands that the explanation be free of elements that have nothing to do with the phenomenon (and the explanation). ~ Wikipedia (yes I trust Wikipedia)

Now I do not believe that the idea that it was communication through thought as seen in Ósanwe-kenta or that it was a conjured-up phantom using or not using the forged Ring for that purpose have elements having nothing to do with the phenomenon. They both explain how it could have been possible for the old man to appear and then suddently disapper.

Although I agree that your idea is most likely, the others are plausible and should not be discarded that easily. I was not looking for a clear answer in this thread, I doubt one can be found, what I search for is alternatives.