Well, sir, although the old saying about "keep your enemies closer" has a certain importance, it still makes no sense at all why Sauron, who was sure he would soon be the sole master of Middle-earth use Saruman as a lieutenant of his forces. In the end both seeked the same - the Ring - and Sauron knew it. But there could only be one who possesed it, so Saruman would have been eliminated. This is beyond doubt, or at least I am sure of it. You say, Sauron could gain some advantages off the alliance - true, useful, but not necessary, not at all. Only a bonus at most.
Plus, I ask for some understanding here, but the whole idea about the son of Sauron makes no sense at all for me. Really, no sense. I mean, why would Sauron in any respect fear Saruman?
From the works we know Gandalf was stronger than Saruman and that Gandalf with the One Ring on would be more or less about as powerful as Saruman. Which leads to the conclusion that no matter what Saruman did it was virtually impossible for him to really do anything in the end against Sauron - it was inevitable, he could not become the next Dark Lord.
This is why I all in all feel that the whole theory of Saruman helping Sauron is based on no evidence at all, hence it appears that Saruman would never have considered truly serving Sauron.
__________________
“The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.”
Delos B. McKown
|