Who was the old man?

[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.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by 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".

I may have meant both. Saruman never uses the power before this or afterwards, and I know of no examples of any other 'living' being using such an ability.

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.

The Barrow-wights are dead creatures, and whatever the Witch-King did to make them, he did it to another being, not to himself. And though the wights somehow can move physical objects (like hobbits), which is completely inexplicable to me, they do not appear as visible beings. And I'm not sure what you mean in regards to Sauron. Sure, he shapeshifted, but he did not project this image at a distance.

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.

Saruman costumes were all the rage in Rohan, I guess. Too bad the Witch-King didn't wear an Aragorn costume.

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?

You've not provided me with enough evidence, but that could just be me.

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.

Hmm...that was not my intent.

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

Agreed; though simpler answers are more likely than more complicated solutions. For instance, if I stated that the hooded old man was actually a holographic projection, then I have to argue for the existence of said projector, etc. And note that I have a different definition of Occam's razor:

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 provided by the person using the phrase, "Occam's razor" to be accepted in toto. ~ Alatarapedia (yes we all should trust Alatarapedia)

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.

Agreed, though genetically it's hard for me to ignore evidence as well as extrapolating far beyond the data.

Not to say that I'm right...

[The Might]

Whilst constantly trying to prove me wrong, I don't see a lot of proof for you being right.

Ok, so I admit the idea with the wraith was a bit stupid, but can you provide me with proof that Saruman had a good reason to run along, say "boo!" to the horses and run along again without using his voice on the travellers or questioning them.

He needed to know what had happened to the Ring, it was a question that was on his mind as seen in some of the quotes above, so why would he not try to find out something from these three guys, they were after all suspiciously close to the place the Orcs were defeated.

Your idea mentioned earlier was that...

having recently commanded his orcs to cut trees from Fangorn, he knows that he's behind enemy lines and so cannot spend too much time on what appears a worthless interrogation

I am sure Saruman had no idea the Ents would have revolted, you see that clearly in the book.

'When the Ents had reduced a large part of the southern walls to rubbish, and what was left of his people had bolted and deserted him, Saruman fled in a panic. He seems to have been at the gates when we arrived: I expect he came to watch his splendid army march out. When the Ents broke their way in, he left in a hurry.

So I doubt Saruman felt to be behind enemy lines due to the Ents and considering how much he wanted the Ring it would only be logical for him to try and find out more about what had happened; as we see above he had no idea whether the Orcs were carrying any prisoners, he could have asked them that.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Might

Whilst constantly trying to prove me wrong, I don't see a lot of proof for you being right.

I'm sorry that you're taking it that way. I'm considering your ideas but checking against what is known. I mean nothing personal, and note below where you show my thinking to be addled.

Ok, so I admit the idea with the wraith was a bit stupid, but can you provide me with proof that Saruman had a good reason to run along, say "boo!" to the horses and run along again without using his voice on the travellers or questioning them.

How about this, which is more of the quote that I had supplied earlier?

Originally Posted by Gandalf the White

His <Saruman's> thought is ever on the Ring. Was it present in the battle? Was it found? What if Theoden, Lord of the Mark, should by it and learn of its power? That is the danger that he sees, and he has fled back to Isengard to double and treble his assault on Rohan

As you say, we can speculate about that which is not clear, which is to me, "Why didn't Saruman think to question these Three that were so near the battle?" Good question, and we can think of reasonable answers.

That said, it was Saruman that appeared - no question, at least to me.

He needed to know what had happened to the Ring, it was a question that was on his mind as seen in some of the quotes above, so why would he not try to find out something from these three guys, they were after all suspiciously close to the place the Orcs were defeated.

Again, I think that he may have thought (we are talking about a literary character here ) that these Three didn't have much to do with the battle, as it was clear the work of the Rohirrim, who left spears, etc.

I am sure Saruman had no idea the Ents would have revolted, you see that clearly in the book.

You got me there; that wasn't well thought (and thank you for bringing it to my attention ).

[Morthoron]

Based on the limited information supplied (basically from Gandalf), it was Saruman. Everything else is conjecture, which is fine I suppose; but looking at the evidence, nothing else makes sense. It was not a 'shadow' of Saruman, but his actual physical manifestation, because the horses were driven off. Unless, of course, the horses were 'spooked' by a spook.

Please, resume your arguments.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Based on the limited information supplied (basically from Gandalf), it was Saruman. Everything else is conjecture, which is fine I suppose; but looking at the evidence, nothing else makes sense. It was not a 'shadow' of Saruman, but his actual physical manifestation, because the horses were driven off. Unless, of course, the horses were 'spooked' by a spook.

Please, resume your arguments.

Perhaps it was the spirit of Saruman, the very one that had bewitched Theoden, and on the way back to Isengard having achieved what evil it required. Though this theory reminds me very much of the film more than anything.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Though this theory reminds me very much of the film more than anything.

And we know how closely that fit Tolkien's works...

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Perhaps it was the spirit of Saruman, the very one that had bewitched Theoden, and on the way back to Isengard having achieved what evil it required. Though this theory reminds me very much of the film more than anything.

Please provide textual evidence that the 'spirit' of Saruman bewitched Theoden. According to Unfinished Tales, Tolkien ascertains that Grima poisoned Theoden, and then Wormtongue used his influence on the drugged king to further Saruman's interests in Rohan. I believe you are having yet another movie moment.

Originally Posted by alatar

I completely disagree. It wasn't until a few months or days before these days that Theoden would have taken action or permitted any action against Saruman - if he ever would, especially when he was still a thrall of Wormtongue. And what evidence do we have that Saruman non-physically wandered the land, and no one was the wiser? Sure, he spied out secrets, but he had time and help in doing so.

I agree with your assumptions. Theoden, under the influence of Grima, forbade any action against Saruman, even though in September of 3018 Gandalf had sought an audience with Theoden (which was at first denied), and he eventually told the king that he had been held captive by Saruman in Orthanc, but Theoden was incapable of making decisions and deferred always to Grima.

After Theodred's murder (Saruman sent the force of orcs to the Fords of Isen with strict orders to kill Theodred), Erkenbrand assumed control of Rohan's forces and sent word to Meduseld for more troops, but he was denied by Theoden (at Grima's insistence). In essence, thereafter Eomer basically broke a royal edict by attacking the Orcs who held Merry and Pippin captive. He was then arrested on Grima's initiative for defying the King's orders.

It is obvious that anyway laying hands on Saruman's person would have been at least imprisoned, or more likely summarily executed by the order of Theoden. In any case, there is little evidence in the text that Saruman wandered about Rohan in spirit form, and if there is, I should like to see it.