Saruman for or against Sauron?

The Two Towers deals with the link between Isengard and Mordor in the battle against ME. However, one thing that I have had trouble deciding was, did Saruman JOIN with Sauron (as with the film), or was there just a casual link between the two (i.e passing of information) from which the treacherous Sauron benefited totally through commanding the will of others from the seeing stones?

I had the idea that Sauron was just using Saruman as a puppet to turn against ME, hence increase his own chances of defeating ME, while never having any plans of formally joining with Saruman. There is no clear evidence that Saruman built his army to directly aid Mordor as far as I have known.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

They were against each other insofar as they both wanted the Ring of Power and both wanted to defeat the other, but they were cooperative because they both felt the threat of the 'good guys', particularly Gondor. They didn't like each other but they hated Gondor more.

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

[Kath]

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

I agree. He was actually very cunning and powerful in his own right. He used Wormtongue to infiltrate Rohan and was doing a fine job of corrupting them until Gandalf showed up. And the power of his voice is never really shown in the film either which is shame as I always thought this a very interesting power in the books.

Saruman wasn't really working for Sauron though I don't think. I would say that they were working in tandem toward a common goal. Both wanted the Ring and power over ME and had Saruman got the Ring he would have had a fair shot at this as the Ring would have magnified his powers.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Saruman betrayed the Council to enter the service of Mordor; he then betrayed Mordor to work to get the Ring for himself. Sauron was aware of this from a very early time, I think. However, Saruman was for the present in his service, at least in public, and so he used Saruman as much as he could. Ultimately Saruman would never have been any match for Sauron, unless he got hold of the Ring, as Gandalf makes clear in Book Three.

[The Only Real Estel]

I think that Saruman did 'join' with Sauron, but had his own plans all along. Like Mansun said, I don't think there is any evidence at all that Saruman bred his army solely to help Sauron, he was breeding them in his own little attmept to copy Sauron's army. If he could get Sauron to fall for his lip-service pitch he could still destroy Rohan (which would help him quite a bit) and hopefully recover the Ring before Sauron did, with a decent sized army to protect him. That said I doubt Sauron fell for it for long.

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

I'll third that. Saruman had his own powers and plans and was a good deal more than a stupid finger puppet, being bent to his new master's will.

[davem]

I think there's also Saruman's envy of Sauron to take into account. Its clear that Saruman saw Sauron as some kind of 'ideal' role-model:

A strong place and wonderful was Isengard, and long it had been beautiful; and there great lords had dwelt, the wardens of Gondor upon the West, and wise men that watched the stars. But Saruman had slowly shaped it to his shifting purposes, and made it better, as he thought, being deceived--for all those arts and subtle devices, for which he forsook his former wisdom, and which fondly he imagined were his own, came but from Mordor; so that what he made was naught, only a little copy, a child's model or a slave's flattery, of that vast fortress, armoury, prison, furnace of great power, Barad-dur, the Dark Tower, which suffered no rival, and laughed at flattery, biding its time, secure in its pride and its immeasurable strength.(The Road to Isengard)

It seems that he wasn't so much competing with Sauron as wanting to become him. Whether Sauron was responsible for putting this desire into his mind, or whether it merely reflected some deep-rooted desire in his own psyche, I don't think we'll ever know for certain.

I think Sauron gave away the idea that he did have a decent understanding (so he thought!) with Saruman. If you remember, Pippin had an encounter with Sauron through the seeing stone, in which Sauron thought he was for a moment communicating with Saruman, asking " Why have you neglected to report for so long?". This implies that Saruman actually betrayed Sauron, but it is highly likely that should Sauron retain the Ring he would brush aside even a loyal Saruman to some low key mischief job, assuming that the Mouth of Sauron was to become the lieutenant of Isengard.

The fact that the Mouth of Sauron also made out that the Darklord no longer trusted Saruman to be worthy of that role when all was to be won at the black gate suggests that he did most likely work well with Saruman initially, but then was betrayed by him. Sauron must have thought Saruman was incapable of getting the Ring in the first place, and even if he got it, Sauron would know exactly where it was, and would bend his power towards Isengard like a storm (or quicker).

[mormegil]

They both agreed that they were working together and Saruman would assume to be the vassel of Sauron if the ring were recovered and M-E conquered. This was the plan on paper. In reality they were each using each other and each thought they had the upper-hand. However Sauron had the mastery. In other words they proclaimed their alligence to on another, or at least Sauron accepted Saruman's aid and offered rewards in return, but as most evil villains will do they would betray each other in the end. So I would argue that Saruman did have some powers yes but they were insignificant next to Mordor and was in fact a puppet to Sauron.

[Boromir88]

I've often compared the Saruman-Sauron relationship like the Hitler-Stalin relationship.

Hitler and Stalin necessarily didn't like eachother (they both had contrasting views) but they agreed to put their differences aside and not attack eachother. For a long time they would help eachother out, but both had plans of undermining eachother once the allies were gone. Hitler knew the two-front war was one reason for Germany's defeat in WW1 so he signs this pact with Russia trying to prevent that again. In secret he just wants to deal with the West first and then turn on Stalin. It was when Hitler believed that the West had been dealt with (one fault) when he turned on Stalin and started invading Russia (another fault).

I think the Sauron and Saruman relationship can be similar to this. They both are after the same thing (The Ring) and they enter into this agreeance of "Look we both hate these people let's get rid of them," but they were secretly planning to betray eachother if and when they finished with Gondor and Rohan.

[Ar-Pharazon]

I don't think Sauron and Saruman were truly allies and more competitors using the metaphor as a chess match, where they would make moves to counter the other.

When Sauron arises in Mirkwood, Saruman goes along with the plan of the council to march on Dol Guldur and force him out. His reasoning was that it would move Sauron farther from Anduin so he couldnt freely search for the ring.

In the UT - Sauron dispatches the Ringwraiths in search of the Ring, but all they know is there is a creature named Baggins and he is in a land called the Shire. The wraiths come upon Isengard. Here the story gets muddled about what exactly happens. But the gist is that Saruman lies to the Ringwraiths about where the Ring is, he either sends them to Rohan and on the way they run into Grima who, out of fear, tells them where the shire is. The other is Saruman sends them on a scenic route north and on the way they run into one of the Ruffians whose working on the shire and he has all sorts of maps on them. Either way the wraiths discover Saruman's treachery and later Sauron learns of it.

When Pippen touches the Palantir, Sauron assumes that because a hobbit touched the stone it is the one that has the Ring and therefore Saruman has the ring. Sauron immediately dispatches a Nazgul on a fell beast who flies over the company after they leave Isengarde.

In my opinion the book's represent Saruman and Sauron as a dueller of wits. For at first Saruman hated Sauron, but after studying him he came to envy his power and respect him as a rival.

~ArP

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Ar-Pharazon

When Sauron arises in Mirkwood, Saruman goes along with the plan of the council to march on Dol Guldur and force him out. His reasoning was that it would move Sauron farther from Anduin so he couldnt freely search for the ring.

This brings to mind something I've been pondering. When Saruman went along with the White Council to work to eject Sauron from Dol Guldur, was he, at that time, using the Palantir? These events took place not long before the beginning of the War of the Ring, and so we must presume that he was using it, that he may have been using it for quite a long while (he might have sought to occupy Isengard as he knew the Palantir was there). So he must have been able to cloak his thoughts and actions from Sauron at that time which begs the question why did he supposedly fall under the influence of Sauron so quickly?

From this line of thought, it is likely that he was not totally in thrall to Sauron. Saruman seemed to seek a 'third way' in Middle earth. This may have begun with him choosing to deal with the problem of the Ring and Sauron in a different way. If we think about the range of suggestions for dealing with the Ring displayed by the great and the good at the Council of Elrond, then it is obvious that the way supported by Gandalf and Elrond is not the only opinion that was held in Middle earth.

What makes Sauron different is that he thought he had the superior knowledge to deal with the Ring in another way. He seeks to discover the nature of Eru and divinity in Arda by breaking the Light, and wishes to use the knowlegde he has gained by taking over from Sauron. Compare this with Galadriel, who is also a power-seeker; when she is offered the Ring she knows that she too could take over and provide a third way, but she instead rejects this power. So I think that this is the key similarity between Saruman and Sauron - they are different characters seeking different ends, but both have such a desire for the Ring that they are prepared to do just about anything to get it.

They are both villains in the grand scheme of Middle earth, and though on the surface they have made an alliance, it is purely a surface alliance in my opinion. Their desire has got the better of them and there is simply no possibility that one can possess the Ring while the other does not have it.

I'd love to think what might have happened between the two of them had Saruman got his hands on the Ring.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

A Third Way? Oo er! If only Tony Blair had long white hair.

Morm, I see what you're saying: that Saruman was effectively a puppet to Sauron and this I can accept. But what he did not do was set out with the intention of joining with Sauron, and this is what the film suggests. Saruman was more of a rebellious adolescent than a naughty child, if you'll follow me.

[Kuruharan]

I'd love to think what might have happened between the two of them had Saruman got his hands on the Ring.

After that particular war would have been over there would not have been enough left over of Saruman to spread on a meager slice of bread and call it Aruman Butter.

[Holbytlass]

Saruman stepped onto Middle-Earth on the side of good, head of the white council, follower of Eru's plan. Somewhere along the way, he wanted to be mightiest, strongest, most powerful being, which doesn't always equate to evil. I don't even see Saruman in the beginning wanting to be evil just most important. Unfortunately, at the time, the thing that could make this happen for him is the One Ring, which is evil.
In Saruman's wish for the ring, he unwisely uses the palantir to see what Sauron is up to, but that entraps himself to Sauron. And in this entrapment, both have some means to their own ends. Saruman might not like being under Sauron's thumb but at least he can use this position to his own advantage by gaining information from Sauron. And Saruman is biding his time until he can recover the ring for himself. Likewise, Sauron thinks he has an 'insider' to the white council and to his enemies.
Saruman got in over his head, and we know what happened to him because things didn't go according to his plan.

Is Saruman for or against Sauron? Saruman is for himself, but his choices cause him to be with Sauron and then under Sauron. Sauron is just as good a 'sweet talker' as Saruman, probably better, which puts enough thoughts into Saruman's head that if he joins Sauron, he could be in a better position to become mightiest, after his betrayal.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

This brings to mind something I've been pondering. When Saruman went along with the White Council to work to eject Sauron from Dol Guldur, was he, at that time, using the Palantir? These events took place not long before the beginning of the War of the Ring, and so we must presume that he was using it, that he may have been using it for quite a long while (he might have sought to occupy Isengard as he knew the Palantir was there). So he must have been able to cloak his thoughts and actions from Sauron at that time which begs the question why did he supposedly fall under the influence of Sauron so quickly?

Actually, according to Gandalf, Saruman probably used the palantir for some time before he finally dared to gaze upon Barad-dur, and thus make contact with the Ithil-stone. "Then he was caught!" So he probably hadn't made contact with Sauron at the time the White Council "forced" the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Elladan and Elrohir

Actually, according to Gandalf, Saruman probably used the palantir for some time before he finally dared to gaze upon Barad-dur, and thus make contact with the Ithil-stone. "Then he was caught!" So he probably hadn't made contact with Sauron at the time the White Council "forced" the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur.

Do you think that Sauron may have been aware that he (or someone, as he may not have been able to identify exacty who) was using the Palantir though? This would mean that Saruman was caught quickly as soon as he tried to communicate with Sauron. And there is another question - would Saruman know who held that Palantir?

I do wonder just whether possession of the Ring would in any way be a 'match' for Mordor's armies? If Saruman had got hold of it, then Sauron's minions would have swept from Mordor, laying waste to Gondor and Rohan on their way. Possibly Gandalf might have had to get involved, attempting to take it from Saruman before the horde descended... I'm not that bothered by a lot of 'what if' speculation but this is a truly frightening prospect, and it does throw Saruman's wrongdoing into sharp relief!

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

A Third Way? Oo er! If only Tony Blair had long white hair.

Something is clearly being withheld from us...

[Kuruharan]

I do wonder just whether possession of the Ring would in any way be a 'match' for Mordor's armies?

Only possession and mastery. I don't recall seeing anywhere an implication that Saruman could have mastered the Ring. I only remember Gandalf as being possibly able to do it.

However, as soon as Saruman tried to master the Ring the armies of Mordor would certainly have made a beeline for Isengard...

[Kath]

Only possession and mastery. I don't recall seeing anywhere an implication that Saruman could have mastered the Ring. I only remember Gandalf as being possibly able to do it.

But if Saruman was originally higher in the Order than Gandalf then surely he should have had an equal if not higher chance of being able to master the Ring?

[Lalwendë]

Yes, the important point is whether Saruman (or anyone for that matter) could master the Ring. Saruman did possess a lot of Ring-lore, but whether it was deep or comprehensive enough to truly master the Ring is something we could only guess at - and I have to say that I think it would not have been; one of Saruman's failings is that he puts too much store in his own learning. But, it is possible that even with a little knowledge Saruman could do something. What would be most likely would be for him to cause chaos, but ultimately he would not have the mastery of the Ring.

I'm not sure whether status would have had that much to do with mastering the Ring, I get the impression that it took understanding of the Ring to master it; couldn't anyone could have the potential to understand it? And as I say above, it might not be possible for anyone apart from Sauron to truly master it (leaving Tom Bombadil aside ). This is why it has to be destroyed. It only has one owner, and that owner means to use it for evil ends. No-one else can really master it, and its true master must not be allowed to master it.

[Kuruharan]

But if Saruman was originally higher in the Order than Gandalf then surely he should have had an equal if not higher chance of being able to master the Ring?

Prestige does not necessarily reflect potency.

From the ever useful Letter #246...

Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn...Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him-being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form.

We have to assume that Saruman fell into the category of "Of the others" even though he too was an emissary of the Powers.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Gandalf would seem to imply otherwise in Book Three: "But Isengard cannot fight Mordor, unless Saruman first obtains the Ring."

Obviously, it's a matter of opinion as to how far that statement can be taken. It may merely mean that Saruman would never feel secure enough to challenge Sauron's might unless he first had the Ring.

EDIT: That "only Gandalf might be expected to master him" quote has been used a lot on the Downs to "prove" that only Gandalf could have mastered the Ring and thus Sauron. I will not do full battle with that argument, but will merely point out that Tolkien uses the curious phrase "might be expected," which implies that this is not a for-sure thing. I will also add that Saruman also fulfills the qualities of Gandalf that are mentioned in this passage: an emissary of the Powers, of the same kind as Sauron; and, as has already been mentioned in this thread, he was before Gandalf's fall and resurrection more powerful (or at least perceived to be more powerful) than the Grey Wizard.

[Kuruharan]

That "only Gandalf might be expected to master him" quote has been used a lot on the Downs to "prove" that only Gandalf could have mastered the Ring and thus Sauron. I will not do full battle with that argument, but will merely point out that Tolkien uses the curious phrase "might be expected," which implies that this is not a for-sure thing. I will also add that Saruman also fulfills the qualities of Gandalf that are mentioned in this passage: an emissary of the Powers, of the same kind as Sauron; and, as has already been mentioned in this thread, he was before Gandalf's fall and resurrection more powerful (or at least perceived to be more powerful) than the Grey Wizard.

So which is it? You are arguing both points.

The "might be expected" part implies that it was not a sure thing that even Gandalf would be able to defeat Sauron even if he mastered the Ring.

Let me do some added emphasis...

only Gandalf might be expected to master him.

This is a statement of the unique stature of Gandalf. I don't see how it could be taken any other way.

Please, feel free to explain why Saruman could have mastered the Ring and proved a match for Sauron. However, bear in mind that you have already mentioned part of the answer to this riddle...

(or at least perceived to be more powerful)

...and that Tolkien said elsewhere...

[Saruman], having lost any devotion to other persons or causes was open to the domination of a superior will, to its threats, and to its display of power. - The Palantiri footnote 14

For a variety of reasons, Saruman was not on Sauron's level and could not be expected to successfully contend with him.

Oh, by the way, there is also another thing relevant to this topic in this little piece...

Saruman fell under the domination of Sauron and desired his victory, or no longer opposed it.
-The Palantiri

I think this sheds some light on the original question.

It might be that all things that become under Sauron's command eventually become under his control through his power, as with the fate of the Nazgul and the Mouth of Sauron, for instance. They are very much Sauron's puppets, doing exactly as he bids, and Saruman may have sensed that this was to be his doom unless he strove for the power of the Ring itself, his ''way-out" from Sauron's clutches.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

So which is it? You are arguing both points.

The "might be expected" part implies that it was not a sure thing that even Gandalf would be able to defeat Sauron even if he mastered the Ring.

Let me do some added emphasis...



This is a statement of the unique stature of Gandalf. I don't see how it could be taken any other way.

Please, feel free to explain why Saruman could have mastered the Ring and proved a match for Sauron. However, bear in mind that you have already mentioned part of the answer to this riddle...



...and that Tolkien said elsewhere...



For a variety of reasons, Saruman was not on Sauron's level and could not be expected to successfully contend with him.

Oh, by the way, there is also another thing relevant to this topic in this little piece...



I think this sheds some light on the original question.

Would Saruman then, after finding out that if he could not master the Ring, hand it back to Sauron if he ever got hold of it? Or if he could master the ring, & I believe that he did have the strength of power & will to do it, would he have enough time to counter Mordor's wave of attacks with just 10,000 uruk-hai?

[Kuruharan]

Would Saruman then, after finding out that if he could not master the Ring, hand it back to Sauron

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.

Or if he could master the ring...would he have enough time to counter Mordor's wave of attacks with just 10,000 uruk-hai?

Depends...

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.



Depends...

I think Saruman deserves a lot of credit for amassing 10,000 formiddable warriors which, man-to-man not even Mordor could match. Perhaps he could have held out against Mordor long enough to wield the ring.

[Kuruharan]

I think Saruman deserves a lot of credit for amassing 10,000 formiddable warriors which, man-to-man not even Mordor could match.

What's your basis for saying that?

The Rohirrim chopped them up pretty good, and they were outnumbered.

Perhaps he could have held out against Mordor long enough to wield the ring.

One has to ask oneself what exactly would happen if this impossible event did take place. It might not have done Saruman any good.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

What's your basis for saying that?

The Rohirrim chopped them up pretty good, and they were outnumbered.



One has to ask oneself what exactly would happen if this impossible event did take place. It might not have done Saruman any good.

The basis is do you think Sauron's orcs were anything like as strong as the Uruk-hai? The only way Sauron could have been victorious would be through sheer strength in numbers through weak puny orcs. Man-to-man the 10,000 Uruk-hai would probably obliviate even 30,000 Mordor orcs. The real difference would be made by Mordor trolls & the Nazgul. But, as Saurman's plans would then have been to shield an attack as oppose to attacking an enemy, there may have been a chance to build even more soldiers whilst the siege on Isengard was taking place.

Orcs do not ride horses like the Rohirrim - a big advantage for the Rohirrim. Take out the horses & then what result would you have forcasted?

[Boromir88]

Sauron actually had more men available to him than Orcs. A lot of Sauron's force was comprised of Men, not 'puny orcs.' Also, Saruman wasn't the one who originally came up with this 'cross-breed' of Orc-Men. it's only something he 'rediscovered' and found out:

"Finally, there is a cogent point, though horrible to relate. It became clear in time that undoubted Men could under the domination of Morgoth or his agents in a few generations be reduced almost to the Orc-level of mind and habits; and then they would or could be made to mate with Orcs, producing new breeds, often larger and more cunning. There is no doubt that long afterwards, in the Third Age, Saruman rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: the interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs large and cunning, and Orc-men treacherous and vile."~Morgoth's Ring

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!

Short of Sauron himself, who would force Saruman to hand over the Ring? It looks pretty clear in the Lord of the Rings and Unfinished Tales that though Saruman was in Sauron's cahoots, if the Ring had slipped into his fingers he would have been "Saruman for Saruman". And, quite frankly, within the safety of Orthanc, we know (from UT) that he needn't fear from Sauron.

The question is how long it would have taken Saruman to master the Ring. Did he have the military resources to hold off Mordor (and possibly the remnants of Rohan and Gondor)? We are told that his efforts in Orthanc were paltry imitations compared to Sauron's war machine. We must, however, acknowledge that he had an army comparable to that of the "good" nations- which fended off Sauron for quite a few years. Furthermore, if Sauron had to fight his way past Gondor and Rohan- that would have bought Saruman more time.

And, of all the people in Middle-Earth, Saruman would probably have made the quickest study in mastering the Ring. Ringlore was, after all, his specialty. His downfall, too, but that's another matter. I personally don't think it would have been long (in a count of years) before he would have been strong enough to crush Sauron with the Ring. The question is whether he would have had that time.

[Boromir88]

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!

Not really, considering the quote provided from Letter 246 where 'only' Gandalf would be expected to master the Ring. And also Sauron knew very well what Saruman was up to, but Sauron being able to use him only as a pawn in his desire to dominate:

'Saruman is a fool, and a dirty treacherous fool. But the Great Eye is on him.'~The Uruk-hai

The big difference between 'good' and 'evil' is the evils inability to 'bond.' 'Good' can ally themselves and come together for a common goal, a common purpose, and a common enemy. Where 'evil' is just all in it for themselves. They may join together, because it would make their goals a lot easier, but behind all the 'buddy-buddy' they are just planning the other's downfall. Because after all there can't be two dark-lords ruling can there be?

I'll take when Sauron joins with Morgoth. A lot of people think that Morgoth sort of sullied or persuaded Sauron to join him. But, actually I think Sauron, much like Saruman was to him, was drawn to Morgoth and really was forming his own plans of ruling. And Sauron being smart knew that the best course for HIMSELF to rule would be to side with Morgoth for the time being...just as Saruman does with Sauron.

'It was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him.'~Morgoth's Ring, Myths Transformed

'Sauron had been attached to the greatest, Melkor, who ultimately became the inevitable Rebel and self-worshipper of mythologies that begin with a transcendent unique Creator.~'Letter 200

I think both of these show that Morgoth did not sort of sully Sauron to his side, but Sauron was attracted to Morgoth's power and will, and he soon attached himself to Morgoth.

Now why would Sauron do this? Well, because I feel like Sauron had his own aspirations of ruling, just as Saruman did. And Sauron knew that Morgoth was a much more inherently powerful being than he was, so in order to achieve his own goal of ruling, he'd join up with Morgoth, and eventually break away, and this is exactly whate he does:

Sauron was not a ’sincere’ atheist, but he preached atheism, because it weakened resistance to himself (and he had ceased to fear God’s action in Arda)..... To wean one of the God-fearing from their allegiance it is best to propound another unseen object of allegiance and another hope of benefits; propound to him a Lord who will sanction what he desires and not forbid it. Sauron, apparently a defeated rival for world-power, now a mere hostage, can hardly propound himself; but as the former servant and disciple of Melkor, the worship of Melkor will raise him from hostage to high priest.~Morgoth’s Ring, Myths Transformed

Sauron did not 'sincerely' believe what Morgoth did or taught. But he knew if he used Morgoth's names and ideas that would make his goal of ruling a lot easier, as people would be drawn to him more. And this is exactly what happens:

'When he found how greatly his knowledge was admired by all other rational creatures and how easy it was to influence them, his pride became boundless. By the end of the Second Age he assumed the position of Morgoth's representative. By the end of the Third Age he claimed to be Morgoth returned.'~Letter 183

As people start listening to him, and resistance was weakening, he was no longer Morgoth's 'servant,' his pride grew and eventually he conceived himself as being Morgoth himself.

Anway, where I'm going with all this is showing the inability for evil guys to bond together. They're in it for themselves. Sauron was drawn in by Morgoth's power, but Sauron himself had his own plans and goals, and he took the best route in joining Morgoth's side, eventhough he necessarily did not agree with his ideas. And this is exactly what Saruman does with Sauron:

A new Power is rising. Against it the old allies and policies will not avail us at all. There is no hope left in Elves or dying Numenor. This then is one choice before you, before us. We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow, and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come at last to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in are hearts, deploring whatever evils done by the way, but approving the high and ultimate purpse: Knowledge, Rule, Order;....~The Council of Elrond

To make my long story short (sometimes I can go off a bit, let's see if I can tie this up). 'Evil' is all in it for themselves, Saruman planned on backstabbing Sauron, and Sauron knew very well what Saruman wanted to do. Seeing all this, I agree with Kuru in that Sauron had Saruman beaten in every aspect, in power, strength of numbers, and knowing what Saruman was up to, and playing Saruman to suit his own advantages. Going back to what Grishnakh said, Saruman was being fooled.

[Kuruharan]

The basis is do you think Sauron's orcs were anything like as strong as the Uruk-hai? The only way Sauron could have been victorious would be through sheer strength in numbers through weak puny orcs. Man-to-man the 10,000 Uruk-hai would probably obliviate even 30,000 Mordor orcs.

Unlikely. The physical differences between them were not that great. Historically speaking, the only way that armies are able to overcome disparities of this nature was by great technical (not physical) superiority or brilliant leadership. Isengard possessed neither of those. An army outnumbered three to one, all other things being relatively equal, would get swamped.

Take out the horses & then what result would you have forcasted?

*cough* I thought it painfully apparent that the example I was citing was the Battle of the Hornburg, where the Rohirrim chopped up the Isengarders largely without their horses.

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!

Not really. We're operating off of an impossible premise here.

Short of Sauron himself, who would force Saruman to hand over the Ring?

I think you just answered your own question.

And, quite frankly, within the safety of Orthanc, we know (from UT) that he needn't fear from Sauron.

I'm rather under the impression that if Isengard was placed under siege it would ultimately fall. Fortresses under siege do not hold out by themselves. There has to be outside help. Where was this outside help to come from in Saruman's case? If nothing else Saruman's physical body could have been starved to death. However, I suspect that long before that conclusion would have been reached, Sauron would have undermined Orthanc and caused it to collapse.

Did he have the military resources to hold off Mordor (and possibly the remnants of Rohan and Gondor)?

No.

We must, however, acknowledge that he had an army comparable to that of the "good" nations- which fended off Sauron for quite a few years.

Hmmm...comparable to Rohan, maybe. Gondor's actual military strength was greater than we saw at Minas Tirith because the southern fiefs were not exactly totally forthcoming with their men. I believe that Tolkien said that many of them only sent a tithe of their strength.

One also gets the impression that up until that point (at least in recent years) Sauron had not been trying that hard but was instead gathering everything together and conserving it for the final blow.

Furthermore, if Sauron had to fight his way past Gondor and Rohan- that would have bought Saruman more time.

Not necessarily. Isengard is actually rather exposed to attack from Mordor. The river could be crossed, and then it is just a march across the Wold, cross another little river, tramp, tramp, tramp, and there you are. Gondor would probably be out of this equation. The Rohirrim might be able to delay Sauron, but I doubt they could stop him.

I personally don't think it would have been long (in a count of years) before he would have been strong enough to crush Sauron with the Ring. The question is whether he would have had that time.

Is there something about Letter #246 that I've been missing all these years?

Let me try this yet again...

Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn...Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him-being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form.
Letter #246

No amount of study would have helped Saruman gain the strength to master the Ring. He was a lesser being than Sauron. He did not have the power within him to be able to do it.

I fail to see how the phrase "only Gandalf" could possibly be up for any other interpretation than in the sense that "only Gandalf" would have been capable of mastering the Ring and challenging Sauron with any hope of emerging victorious.

EDIT: Cross-posted with Boromir88

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Not really, considering the quote provided from Letter 246 where 'only' Gandalf would be expected to master the Ring. And also Sauron knew very well what Saruman was up to, but Sauron being able to use him only as a pawn in his desire to dominate.

I'll take your point about Sauron being very much in the know about everything Saruman was up to... but I would quibble over giving too much weight to the quote about "only Gandalf". Coming, as it does, from a letter, it is naturally of somewhat weakened weight if it contradicts the Legendarium directly, which it might be said to do.

Because, I must confess, I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman. They were both Istari, both Maiar in human form. Both fairly close in power. (Indeed, Saruman the White seems to have been more powerful than Gandalf the Grey. Intimations are made that Gandalf, though not head of the order or council, was the greater of the two, but I would call these tenuous and certainly a strong case can be made to the contrary. In any event, they were very close.) Prior to Gandalf's death, rebirth, and reappointment into what were Saruman's shoes, it seems to me that if Gandalf could have wielded the Ring, then Saruman could have.

What's more, and maybe it's just my idiosyncratic view of Middle-Earth at work here, but my reading of the books always left me with the idea that Gandalf, Elrond, or Galadriel had pretty much equal chances of becoming successful Dark Lords (or Lady) had they succumbed to the Ring's evil. Consequently, I have no difficulties seeing Saruman as being able, had he acquired the Ring.

I do agree though, that Sauron was playing him for a fool: hook, line, and sinker.

[Boromir88]

Intimations are made that Gandalf, though not head of the order or council, was the greater of the two, but I would call these tenuous and certainly a strong case can be made to the contrary.

I don't know about that. Saruman the White was certainly more powerful than Gandalf the Grey (but was Curumo more powerful than Olorin?), because Saruman was placed as the head of the Istari. And as the head, he was granted more power, or the ability to use more of his power.

In dire needs Gandalf would reveal his true power (for example his fight with Durin's Bane), but he still remained in conformity to the Rules that were placed upon him, where Saruman didn't. Saruman the White was more powerful than Gandalf the Grey, but this was only because of the restrictions placed upon him, and his over-whelmingly good nature of following these restrictions:

This is sort of a nifty what if scenario that Tolkien gives us. Where Gandalf could give Sauron a run for his money.

One can imagine the scene in which Gandalf, say, was placed in such a position. It would be a delicate balance. On one side the true allegiance of the Ring to Sauron; on the other superior strength because Sauron was not actually in possession, and perhaps also because he was weakened by long corruption and expenditure of will in dominating inferiors.~Letter 246

And Saruman was a great studier of Ring-lore, but I think we can question exactly how much he knew...considering the Ring he attempted to make seems to have been a failure and he hadn't worked out all the kinks yet. And finally, it takes more than knowledge to master the Ring:

If that would happen, the new posessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic enough by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place.~Letter to Milton Waldman

Which brings up the questions
1. Did Saruman have the necessary strength? This I admit can be debated. Because I do now see a bit of ambiguity with Letter 246. 'only Gandalf might be expected...' So even though if Gandalf is the only one 'expected' to challenge Sauron one-on-one, it doesn't necessarily mean he was the only one capable of doing so.

It's like if I said, I only expect Italy to beat USA. It doesn't mean that Italy would beat them, or is the only one capable, but it's the only team I 'expect' to do so.

2. Did he have the knowledge that it took? Saruman went into studying Ring-lore, but was this the right place he needed to actually master the Ring? As this quote suggests you need to look more at Sauron and what he was doing after making the Ring, than the Ring itself. And this is something we know that Gandalf did do (and the reason the Istari were sent to Middle-earth), as we find out he alone goes through Dol Guldur and to find out about the 'Necromancer.'

[SarumanCymraeg]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Because, I must confess, I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman.

I would agree with this, although it is a delicate balance. Saruman the White, I should think, would be able to because Saruman the White is on par with Gandalf the White. However, by 'The Voice of Saruman' chapter, before that even, Saruman has long forsaken the 'White' of his name, and that is how Gandalf is able to break his staff.

Gandalf himself says that he IS Saruman when he re-appears. That would also suggest, I believe, that if Gandalf could master the Ring, so could Saruman.

In addition, Saruman's ring-lore must be considered, and I would imagine that he knew more than Gandalf or any other of the Wise (save possibly Galadriel?). At the beginning of his research, Saruman would have looked into the matter with good faith, and not with the intention of having the Ring for himself. He is very learned in ring-lore, and I would imagine that this knowledge would help him master the Ring for himself, and even though he was, in effect, a puppet of Sauron (though a particularly independent-minded and treacherous one), as soon as the opportunity came for him to challenge his 'master', then he would.

The Ring would be the only way for him to challenge Sauron, and if it came to him I really should think that Saruman, wise as he is, would make sure that he did not waste that opportunity.

So I think Saruman could have mastered the Ring, and done so well. I also think Gandalf and Galadriel could have, but that's another threadsworth of debate

[Kuruharan]

I would quibble over giving too much weight to the quote about "only Gandalf".

I don't see how it would be possible to do so.

I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman.

-and-

my reading of the books always left me with the idea that Gandalf, Elrond, or Galadriel had pretty much equal chances of becoming successful Dark Lords (or Lady) had they succumbed to the Ring's evil. Consequently, I have no difficulties seeing Saruman as being able, had he acquired the Ring.

These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.

Because I do now see a bit of ambiguity with Letter 246. 'only Gandalf might be expected...' So even though if Gandalf is the only one 'expected' to challenge Sauron one-on-one, it doesn't necessarily mean he was the only one capable of doing so.

Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring. The "might be expected" clause only reinforces the idea that even in that case it is not a sure thing that Gandalf could win, but Gandalf is the only one who had even a chance of winning.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I don't see how it would be possible to do so.



These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.



Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring. The "might be expected" clause only reinforces the idea that even in that case it is not a sure thing that Gandalf could win, but Gandalf is the only one who had even a chance of winning.

If Gandalf might be the only one expected to master the Ring, WHY? What is the real reason? Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers? The whole point of Saruman turning to evil would almost seem pointless, unless he was truly in allegiance with Sauron & hoped to secure the Ring for him. I think if asked, Tolkein would admit that Elrond, Galadriel & perhaps Saruman WERE capable of wielding the ring, with time.

If Sauron knew that only Gandalf could challenge him with the Ring, would it have not been wise to deal with him before turning to the siege of Gondor?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.

Opinions expressed in the Letters cannot be taken as canonical. We don't have any context for such statements, as we don't have the letters Tolkien was responding to. Also, its easy to make statements in letters because they don't have to be made to fit the story. Tolkien was free to say anything in his letters without having to worry whether his statements would cause a problem. The letters were not written for publication - I think he would have been a lot more careful in what he said if they had been.

In short, statements in the letters were made off the cuff, & I'm sure Tolkien never expected them to be challenged. They also reflect his later thoughts & his personal opinions on the story as well as his interpretations of events. If a statement of Tolkien's in a letter to F. Bloggs in 1962 challenges or contradicts an explicit statement in LotR as published then whatever is stated in the book takes precedence.

The Letters are interesting & often helpful, but clearly the statement that only Gandalf could master the Ring is false because it contradicts what is both stated & implied in LotR.

Of course, the Legendarium changed over the years, characters altered, things were added, but new thoughts would often lead to dead ends. I give no more weight to much that is in the Letters than I do to what is contained in the whole 'Myths Transformed' farrago.

If we take Tolkien's statement re Gandalf & the Ring as fact then much of the dramatic tension in LotR is dissipated & we would read it thinking, 'Well, that's just them being silly!'. It is essential in reading LotR that we know that not just Gandalf but Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel as well as Saruman could take, master & wield the Ring.

[Boromir88]

Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring.~Kuru

Sorry, if it feels like we're gaining up on you, but besides what davem said, 'expectations' are not always certainty. And that's exactly what the Letter 246 quote says...'might be expected.' Again, even if Gandalf was the only one expected to be able to master the ring:

1) Doesn't mean that he could do so.
2) Doesn't mean anyone else wouldn't be able to do so.

Like the Italy-USA example given. You're focusing on the world 'only' where the words of 'might' and 'expect' add ambiguity to the quote. 'Might' is a term of uncertainty, it 'may happen' or it 'may not happen.' And expect is another term of ambiguity. Like, I expect USA to win the Olympics, it's something I definitely think is going to happen, 'I'm expecting it,' but that doesn't mean USA is going to win the olympics. Same case in this quote, you're putting emphasis on the 'only' where might and expect is what adds ambiguity and uncertainty. Tolkien being the linguist, and on the back cover of Letters of JRR Tolkien him saying the importance he put on every single word (which he guessed was over 600,000). So, I don't think 'might' and 'expect' two words of uncertainty should simply be ignored.

I said I agreed with you (and I still do), in that Saruman did not possess the capability, nor perhaps the knowledge it took to master the Ring, I'm just pointing out the ambiguity that Formendacil and others have noticed with Letter 246. The quote is not so rock-solid and sure as you have made it out to be.

Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers?~Mansun

It's called pride, Saruman was prideful and confident in his abilities to fool Sauron so he could profit. Just because Saruman believed he was pulling one over Sauron, and had thought he was capable of mastering the Ring, doesn't mean he actually was. And as Grishnakh says, it was Saruman who was the one being fooled. I'll give a perfect example, Denethor and the palantir. Denethor believed he had the strength and will power necessary to challenge and beat Sauron in the palantir, but this didn't happen:

Thus pride increased in Denethor, together with despair, until he saw in all the deeds of that time only a single combat between the Lord of the White Tower, and the Lord of Barad-dur...~Appendix A: The Stewards

Denethor believed (key word being pride) he had the will it took to view the palantir and one-on-one challenge Sauron, but he was beaten and his mind was eventually overthrown.

Gandalf himself says that he IS Saruman when he re-appears. That would also suggest, I believe, that if Gandalf could master the Ring, so could Saruman.~Saruman

But he actually says that he was 'Saruman as he should have been.' So, he actually wasn't really Saruman, but he was as Saruman should have been as the head of the Order.

In addition, Saruman's ring-lore must be considered, and I would imagine that he knew more than Gandalf or any other of the Wise.

I don't think it took knowledge about the rings (and I actually think we are told Saruman's main interest were the three elven rings, but don't hold me to that ). As the quote to Milton Waldman suggests...

become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring and so overthrow him and usurp his place.

This seems to stress the importance of actually knowing what Sauron was doing since making his Ring, more than the fact of knowing about the Rings of power.

[Kuruharan]

Greetings davem.

I thought I would drag you out of the woodwork.

I'm afraid I have to admit that I don't find much relevance in your post. The expressed opinions by the author regarding the events and circumstances of his or her own stories are what carry weight when compared to the speculations of readers, no matter where or in what form the expressed opinions of the author happen to appear. I'm not refering to themes or interpretations of the stories here, I'm refering to events. Obviously, themes and interpretations are freely speculated upon by anybody and everybody. However, if you are attempting to postulate alternative scenarios to what would have happened in the story, I think that if the author makes any comments in the area under consideration we have to defer to their judgment if we wish to continue to discuss the works of the author in question. If we the readers want to continue our little line of thought, we need to do it with the understanding that we have departed the discussion of the work of the author and are instead pursuing our own. This is the main point I've been trying to get across.

There is one thing I wish to discuss though...

It is essential in reading LotR that we know that not just Gandalf but Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel as well as Saruman could take, master & wield the Ring.

I don't think it is possible for me to disagree more strongly with this statement. It is not essential that Gandalf, Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel, and Saruman possess the potential to supplant Sauron. I think the reverse is true. I think the fact that they are being lied to by the Ring and their own desires when they have no hope of actually achieving their fevered imaginings heightens the tension. If they try to take the Ring, they will fall to Sauron (only Gandalf potentially excepted) and the plot of The Lord of the Rings is about avoiding this fate.

Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers?

Perhaps he wrote it as a lesson in self-delusion. As Boromir88 said, Saruman’s desires were lying to him. His ego would never allow him to admit to himself (or probably even entertain the thought in any way) that he was utterly incapable of mastering the Ring and nothing he could do would change that. However, I think probably Tolkien’s primary motivation for writing the story that way was because it made for a great yarn.

'expectations' are not always certainty. And that's exactly what the Letter 246 quote says...'might be expected.' Again, even if Gandalf was the only one expected to be able to master the ring:

Have you stopped to ask yourself the question of who is doing the expecting?

Doesn't mean anyone else wouldn't be able to do so.

And here we are back with the same old “only Gandalf” business again.

So, I don't think 'might' and 'expect' two words of uncertainty should simply be ignored.

Again, ask yourself who is doing the expecting.