Why didn't Saruman go to the Shire to take the Ring?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Yes, but likely the Nazgul who was sent to Isengard after the incident of Dol Baran demanded and obtained some explanations. I am not sure Sauron was satisfied though: he left Saruman in peace for a time, but at some point he did promise Isengard to The Mouth of Sauron.

Well, I think the Nazgul found just shut windows and flooded Isengard, the same as Gandalf did. Gandalf even says something like that, when riding with Pippin, I think - he says also that Sauron would crush Saruman now, but he cannot, Gondor and Rohan are between them. Sauron was not "satisfied" by any means, and the only reason why he left Saruman in peace was simply that he had to deal with his enemies fast. Even if Saruman had the Ring now, he could not attack him directly, until he could surround Orthanc by his armies.

That is much better than in A, no doubt. No slips of the tongue.

Yes, definitely.

Spies, I think - most likely among the uruks (or maybe Dunlendings). Saruman's uruks ultimately came from Mordor, so it was easy to plant a couple spies among them. Sauron had spies in Minas Tirith it seems - that's how he learned of the dream Faramir and Boromir had. Sauron had informers even in Shagrat's band:

Well yes, although it's a bit different having spies among your own servants and having spies in Orthanc, but it actually makes a lot of sense. Good idea. (Even though still I have to wonder, how did those spies communicate with Sauron. Okay, possibly they went [Orcs] let's say to Moria [Orcs] - where Sauron had, since some time, his own Orcs - and from there it was passed on; or to some other agents living in a cottage in Eastfold or such, who again passed the message on... meeting spies from the eastern riverbank every full moon or something like that... And Sauron had enough time to get this information.)

And as for the hypothesis of him seeing it with the Palantír, possible, but still, I am not sure how much accurately he could see with it - if there was not any "interference" because of the distance, or perhaps because of Saruman's art or something else?

I share your love for "the Hunt" and other Unfinished Tales. Such a shame "the Hunt" manuscripts are not published in full! I think, I like it so much because it is written much more realistically than the main narrative of LOTR. Here we learn of the motivations behind the actions of the good and the bad characters, of spies and traitors, of doubts and some unsavory decisions of the Wise.
The scenes with the nazgul before the Gates of Isengard and the questioning of Grima are very compelling and powerful. Pity we see no interaction between bad guys in LOTR (except between orcs, like the talk between Gorbag and Shagrat which I love as well).

Yes! Exactly. Actually, what I liked the most when I read the books for the first time was the Uruk-hai chapter and Uglúk & Grishnákh exchanges...

Yes, it is baffling. This part hardly agrees with the other texts of "the Hunt". The very facts that Sauron had sent only 40 uruks to Saruman's 80 and also had forbidden the nazgul (who was near Amon Hen) to cross Anduin don't make sense to me at all. What harm could there have been to Mordor's secrecy if one starry night the nazgul landed his beast in front of Ugluk's band and kindly asked them to please turn eastwards?

Well, I think Sauron was a bit naive in his power, I think - he believed that Saruman would not be able to withstand him, that he is a coward (in which he was right), and will hand over the prisoners and not dare to start anything in fear of Sauron's vengeance if he did. It was possibly also that "you send forty Orcs, I send forty Orcs, they will have a nice cooperation", just Saruman proved to be more daring here and sent twice more. (Or maybe it was "Let's meet by the river, each of us will send exactly twenty Orcs." Grishnákh comes with forty: "Guess what. Sauron lied." Uglúk: "Guess what. Saruman lied... more!" )
As for the Nazgul, it was some sort of "taboo" - Nazgul simply are NOT crossing the river, that's an order. You have to consider that we are looking at it from our a bit postmodern point of view, but it is something similar as when let's say in some ancient culture, people were banned to wear yellow colour. Sometimes, it did not even have any logical explanation why they should not do so, but it simply was the way it was done. You simply don't do that. Point.

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Did he know how Isildur fell? Sauron was already neutralized by then, and would have had no particular knowledge of a skirmish two years later- and certainly wouldn't have any idea that the Ring, specifically, caused Isildur's death by slipping off at the wrong moment. The attacking Orcs didn't know about the Ring, and in the west only three survivors brought the news of the disaster to Elrond (only one of whom, "Ohtar," actually knew about the Ring).

For that matter, did Sauron even know that Isildur took the Ring? He was already 'dead.' PJ notwithstanding, it was Elendil and Gil-galad who did him in: Isildur was just looting the corpse.

In short, Isildur's possession of the Ring was known to very, very few: Elrond, the sole witness, and the survivors of the Gladden. Elrond's knowledge was circulated among the Wise, but is was always highly classified information.

But like Gordis says, Sauron knew and it was mentioned several times even in LotR (Shadows of the Past, Gandalf says something like "He knows where Isildur fell. He knows that it is a Ring..." etc.)