Chapter 4 Speaking of the Lord to the master: John Beveridge, Ludwik Zamenhof and the Esperanto translation of the Bible

Building a corpus and a community

Ludwik Zamenhof launched the basis of Esperanto in 1887, in a booklet in Russian – the language in which he had been educated in tsarist Russia. Aside from an introduction justifying the need for an international auxiliary language, this booklet contained a grammar section, a dictionary and writing samples. Amidst original and translated poetry and prose, two writing samples stood out in this booklet. The first text published in Esperanto, on page nineteen of the Russian original of the book, was Patro Nia – Zamenhof’s translation of the Lord’s Prayer – which was followed by the initial verses of the Old Testament’s book of Genesis.³ Hence, it is no exaggeration to say that the history of Esperanto translation began with religious texts.

In the years following 1887, Ludwik Zamenhof translated scientific articles and various literary works including Charles Dickens’s, William Shakespeare’s, Nikolai Gogol’s and Friedrich Schiller’s, as well as Indian tales and Hans Christian Andersen’s fables. He also translated lesser-known short stories, novels and poems with the purpose of validating the grammar rules he proposed. All of this would demonstrate the potential of Esperanto for literary use and, ultimately, for the creation of original Esperanto literature.⁴

Ludwik Zamenhof conceived himself as the initiator and enabler of the language, but not its owner. Following these initial steps and translations, Zamenhof took a back seat in the development of Esperanto, declaring the language ‘property of society’ and renouncing all personal rights over it.⁵ In providing these specimens of translations, he set the stage for the organic development of the language, leaving the task of developing further vocabulary and a literary corpus to Esperanto’s emerging language community.

Translating distinguishable literary works was a way of giving visibility to Esperanto: if the language is developed enough to express the nuances of Eliza Orzeszkowa’s Marta or William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, it should be developed enough to convey any complex form of human feeling and expression. This logic meant that translating religious scriptures became a priority for Zamenhof and other Esperanto pioneers:

Neniu libro estas tiel konata en la tuta civilizita mondo, kiel la Biblio; kaj se ni povus montri al la mondo, ke Esperanto posedas la tradukon de la tuta Biblio, tio estus por ni tre potenca propagandilo. […] Por la plimulto de la nuntempaj kulturaj lingvoj la Biblio estis la ĉefa bazo, sur kiu la lingvoj literaturiĝis kaj disvolviĝis; tial ankaŭ por nia lingvo sendube estos tre grave, se ĝi posedos en si en plena tuteco tiun bazon kun ĝiaj multaj vortoj kaj esprimoj, kiuj fariĝis elementa necesaĵo por ĉiu nuntempa kultura lingvo.⁶

Drawing on his Jewish origins, Ludwik Zamenhof largely took this effort into his own hands in 1906 by translating excerpts from Ecclesiastes – the Old Testament’s first book in the canonical order – from Hebrew into Esperanto.⁷ Encouraged by the interest shown by Esperanto speakers – many of whom inquired about the translation during the 1907 Universal Congress of Esperanto, held in Cambridge – Zamenhof continued translating the initial books of the Old Testament over the following years. He initially published these translations in the monthly periodical La Revuo, later reissuing them as standalone volumes with the French publishing house Hachette.⁸ In the preambles to his translations, Zamenhof not only clarified some of his vocabulary choices but also expressed a degree of unease regarding this task:

La personoj religiaj volu pardoni min, ke mi – ne pastro kaj ne specialisto en aferoj religiaj – entreprenis fari la tradukon de verko religia; sed mi povas min senkulpigi per tio, ke mi tradukis la Psalmaron ne kiel verkon religian, sed kiel gravegan verkon de la homara literaturo. Por celoj pure religiaj eble pli aŭ malpli frue aperos alia traduko, farita de ekleziuloj-specialistoj.⁹

In the preambles, Ludwik Zamenhof described his approach to the scriptures as texts of literary rather than religious value. However, while his Jewish background and knowledge of Hebrew qualified him to translate books from the Old Testament, he did not feel similarly well placed to translate the New Testament from Ancient Greek. This was one of the reasons why he chose not to undertake this endeavour on his own.

Most importantly, Ludwik Zamenhof was far from being the only Esperanto speaker concerned with the scriptures. E. Neumark from Grodno, then in tsarist Russia, translated Ruth – the eighth book of the Old Testament – into Esperanto in 1893, drawing on the original in Hebrew and on its previous translations in Russian, German, Arabic and Persian.¹⁰ In 1906, W. B. Mielck and F. Stefan translated Matthew – the first book of the New Testament – based not on the Ancient Greek original¹¹ but on Martin Luther’s translation into German.¹²

Meanwhile, other Esperanto speakers published translations of scriptures in La Revuo and other magazines such as the Catholic periodical Espero Katolika (Catholic Hope) – published since 1903 – and the interdenominational, predominantly Protestant periodical Dia Regno (God’s Kingdom) – launched in 1908. At the time, a periodical such as Dia Regno had a significant transnational reach, as it was subscribed to by individuals and Esperanto clubs in Germany, Finland, the US, Portugal, Bulgaria and India/British Empire, with around 900 copies in circulation.¹³

Clergymen such as the Presbyterian minister John Beveridge and the Anglican priest John Cyprian Rust (1841–1927) gave sermons during Esperanto congresses, as well as translated devotionals. The wider purposes of the use of Esperanto in the religious realm were perhaps best summarised in Dia Regno: to propagate Esperanto among churches, clergymen and missions, encourage the use of the language in churches and publish and disseminate religious texts through Esperanto.¹⁴ In other words, promoting the language via faith was a key objective in addition to building religious vocabulary and showcasing Esperanto’s literary value.

Prayers and excerpts from the Bible had already been translated into other constructed languages¹⁵ such as Volapük¹⁶ – which is not surprising, given that its initiator, Johann Martin Schleyer (1831–1912), was a Catholic priest who designed Volapük following a divine revelation.¹⁷ Against this background, what would make Esperanto stand out would be the publication of the complete translation of both the Old and New Testaments.

It was John Cyprian Rust who took charge of formalising such an initiative. At the 1907 Universal Congress of Esperanto, Rust founded the Esperanto Bible Translation Committee. However, this first committee quickly dissolved, with some members resigning and others remaining inactive. We may not know whether Rust was of a particularly stubborn nature or on a mission, but we do know that he soon revived this initiative. In 1909, at the British Congress of Esperanto in Leeds, he recruited new members.¹⁸ Since this new attempt took place during the British Congress, all members on this committee were British, but this time Rust’s effort was successful and the translation work got under way.

This brings us back to the letter that opened this chapter. On 9 June 1909, William Main Page informed John Beveridge that the British Congress in Leeds had elected the latter as a member of the Biblia Komitato, the Bible Translation Committee:

Mi entreprenis ke membroj de la Edimburga grupo tradukos la Apokalipson, kaj post kiam la traduko estos farita mi sendos ĝin al vi por ekzamenado. Aliaj el la ĉeestantoj entreprenis traduki diversajn partojn de la Nova Testamento, kaj mi kredas ke laboro estos kompleta antaŭ la jarfino.¹⁹

Following the British Congress in Leeds, the communication between the Committee’s voluntary translators was carried out via correspondence. John Cyprian Rust, convener of the Committee,²⁰ was an Anglican priest born in Colchester, Essex, who spent most of his life as the vicar of the Anglican church in Soham, Cambridgeshire. Rust shared the role of main proofreader and copyeditor of the translation²¹ with Alfred Edward Wackrill (1862–1924), an engineer born in Leamington, Warwickshire, who had worked for years as land surveyor-general in Ceylon²² before settling down in London in 1904.²³ John Beveridge, in turn, had been formally welcomed to the Committee by William Main Page, an English solicitor born in London who later moved to Edinburgh, building a career in the Scottish High Court.²⁴

These lay translators actively engaged with Esperanto in different domains. Rust was responsible for the first known Christian preaching in Esperanto, on the occasion of the 1906 Universal Congress of Esperanto, in Geneva. Rust also wrote the first Order of Mass leaflet in Esperanto, which included a Christian hymn tune that he composed for an original Esperanto text.²⁵ This leaflet outlined the Christian Mass he celebrated during the 1907 Universal Congress of Esperanto, in Cambridge. Rust was also a regular contributor to La Revuo.

Contrasting with Rust’s and Beveridge’s religious and organisational contributions to Esperanto, Wackrill belonged to the first generation of members of the London Esperanto Club, founded in 1903, and became a member of the Akademio de Esperanto – the Academy of the Esperanto Language – in 1908.²⁶ Wackrill also held the editorship of the periodical The British Esperantist, translated English literary works such as Shakespeare’s Venecia Komercisto (The Merchant of Venice) and compiled a list of root words that later became part of an official compendium to Zamenhof’s Universala Vortaro (Universal Dictionary). Page, in turn, held significant roles such as editor of the periodicals The Esperanto Monthly and The British Esperantist. He was also co-editor of the Enciklopedio de Esperanto (1933), and acted as secretary of the Edinburgh Esperanto Society and president of the Scottish Esperanto Federation. Later, in 1926, Page was elected president of the Universal Congress of Esperanto held in Edinburgh. Even though not all these translators were active in religious spaces, they were heavily invested in various roles and offices in and around Esperanto.

The Committee’s work initially focused on the New Testament. John Rust and William Page took the lead and approached potential contributors, divided the tasks to be carried out, and gathered and revised the translation drafts in consultation with other competent Esperanto speakers. In this regard, the letter that opened this chapter – in Esperanto, sent by Page to Beveridge on 9 June 1909 – indicated that John Beveridge was expected to also contribute to the revision of translation drafts. On the same day, Rust also wrote to Beveridge, in a letter in English, to assign him the translation of the First Epistle to Timothy (1 Timothy), the Second Epistle to Timothy (2 Timothy), and the Epistle to Titus. Interestingly, the labour of translating the New Testament – which would be conducted largely via the exchange of letters – formally began with the translation of the pastoral epistles, which take the shape of letters – from Paul the Apostle to Timothy and Titus.

In June 1909, despite recognising the arduous work ahead, both Rust and Page were optimistic that the New Testament would be fully translated by the end of that year.²⁷ Yet this proved to be too optimistic, and their expectation would not be met. The scriptures required their translators not only to be proficient writers of Esperanto but also proficient readers of Ancient Greek, as the Committee’s work involved comparing the New Testament in Ancient Greek with its existing translations in Latin, English and, depending on each translator’s skills, other modern languages.²⁸ As a clergyman passionate about languages and the words of the Lord, Beveridge was among the few who actually had the expertise required.

And the Word was progressively made flesh

In 1909, William Page and John Rust were in haste to translate the New Testament. Both sought to make the most of the momentum that Esperanto enjoyed in those years, and were hopeful that this translation would give more visibility to Esperanto among Christians and visibility to Christianity among Esperanto speakers. The Committee aimed to have the New Testament in Esperanto ready to be presented at major Esperanto and Christian events in 1910, such as the British Congress of Esperanto, the Universal Congress of Esperanto and the World Missionary Conference. Page also planned to distribute copies of the translation to members of the Christian Commonwealth, along with an Esperanto key.²⁹

The aim to have the translation of the Bible ready for the 1910 World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh sets this project into a wider context of religious dissemination and the mission movement. In this regard, the World Missionary Conference was an opportunity not to be missed. A previous missionary conference held in London in 1888 had brought together over 1,500 delegates from around 130 Protestant denominations, aiming to debate ways to spread both the gospel and civilisation as part of a global mission project. A second World Missionary Conference took place in New York in 1900. Over ten days in April and May 1900, more than 200,000 people attended the sessions held at Carnegie Hall – including prominent political figures such as Theodore Roosevelt, then Governor of New York.³⁰

The World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh had been in the making for three years, and its planning must have been known to the group of Esperanto translators – not least as the conference’s organising committee had met repeatedly in Edinburgh in the months leading up to 1910.³¹ Starting in 1907, various committees worked on publications around major themes, all published as standalone volumes, such as Carrying the Gospel to All the Non-Christian World³² and The Church in the Mission Field.³³ Having the Esperanto Bible translation, or at least the New Testament, ready by June 1910 would have meant an unprecedented opportunity to present Esperanto to the over 1,200 people participating in that conference.³⁴

But when Randall Davidson – then Archbishop of Canterbury – opened the Edinburgh conference, the New Testament in Esperanto was not yet ready. The group of translators had encountered numerous setbacks. On several occasions, Rust apologised to Beveridge for delays in revising the translations – delays largely due to the fact that some of the submitted drafts were of such poor quality that Rust felt compelled to redo them entirely.³⁵

Members of the Bible Translation Committee do not appear to have been selected primarily on the basis of their Esperanto proficiency.³⁶ The substandard quality of several translation drafts, as well as the frequent language mistakes in letters that Rust, Page and Beveridge received from other volunteers, attest to how the translation of the New Testament was carried out by Esperanto enthusiasts who were, ultimately, amateur linguists.

Yet this form of amateur approach in the religious milieu was not atypical. From the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century, numerous denominations were deeply invested in the globalisation of religion. While some of these denominations were more institutionalised and closely regulated – such as those behind the organisation of the World Missionary Conferences – others were less centralised and more focused on autonomous initiatives. These latter denominations provided groups of laypeople with room and encouragement to demonstrate their commitment to faith by taking their own initiative and spreading faith in a hands-on manner.³⁷ The Esperanto speakers in the Bible Translation Committee aligned primarily with the latter trend.

In the first decade of the twentieth century, despite setbacks and delays, Esperanto gradually established a presence in the Christian milieu. In addition to the previously mentioned periodicals Espero Katolika and Dia Regno, Christian Esperanto speakers came to organise regular meetings and worship services. They also held the First Congress of Catholic Esperantists in Paris, in 1910, where the Internacia Katolika Unuiĝo Esperantista (International Union of Catholic Esperantists, IKUE) was founded.³⁸ Realising that the New Testament would not be ready in time for the congresses in 1910, the Committee sought to translate at least the Sermon on the Mount.

The Sermon on the Mount, as well as the Gospel According to Matthew – the first book of the New Testament – had initially been assigned to an Episcopal clergyman from Edinburgh, who never sent his translations. These tasks were then transferred to John Beveridge.³⁹ Such incidents – from poor quality translations to contributions never received – reveal how the Bible Translation Committee was a loosely established network, rather than a fixed group. Several members joined the Committee but never effectively collaborated, while a number of Esperanto speakers and clergymen not formally on the Committee occasionally contributed through revising texts, forwarding correspondence or contacting publishers potentially interested in undertaking this project.

Meanwhile, Beveridge’s translation of the Sermon on the Mount from the Ancient Greek original put him on the international map of Esperantujo.⁴⁰ Following the publication of the booklet, Beveridge received numerous compliments for his services to God and to Esperanto, as well as for ‘perfectly preserving the sense of the Holy Scriptures’.⁴¹ This praise came in postcards sent from places such as England, Belgium, Finland, the Russian Empire and Brazil.⁴² Elsewhere, Esperanto periodicals advertised the leaflet, attesting to the wide reach of his translation.⁴³

However, in February 1910, a new layer was added to the work of translating the New Testament. On 5 February, Rust received a letter from Ludwik Zamenhof in Esperanto, in which the latter asked whether someone had already been translating the Old Testament. If not, Zamenhof would be happy to do it himself.⁴⁴ Zamenhof’s proposal caused a stir in the Committee, expressed in fast-paced correspondence exchanges among Rust, Beveridge, Wackrill and Page. The four translators were happy to accept Zamenhof’s offer – as stated by Wackrill, in English, on 10 February: ‘The main thing is: not to miss the opportunity of getting the work done by the most competent hand that the world is ever likely to produce. Time flies, and Zamenhof will not live forever. Every day lost now may mean a page of his great work is lost forever’. However, the same letter introduced Wackrill’s caveats: ‘Beg him to begin at once; but by all means submit a memorial, for his consideration, on the words Elohim and Jehovah’, as well as ‘To ask permission to criticise his manuscript is out of the question. He would take it as a veto on the whole work’.⁴⁵

Despite the openness and humbleness that Zamenhof expressed in his letter offering to collaborate, there were limits to how much the Committee would be able to intervene in the translation made by Zamenhof – after all, he was the initiator of the language. More importantly, as summarised by Wackrill’s first caveat, the Committee was particularly concerned about the extent to which Zamenhof’s Old Testament would preserve or challenge certain Christian principles, which could end up making his translation incompatible with the New Testament. Ultimately, the question was: in case of disagreements, whose word would prevail, the words of the Lord or the words of the master – Esperanto’s majstro?

The road to modernity, between the Lord and the master

The multilingualism of this endeavour was conspicuous. Having already translated eight books of the Old Testament – each published as a separate volume – Zamenhof continued translating the Old Testament from Hebrew, carefully comparing his translation with versions in several national languages.⁴⁶ This constant cross-referencing between languages left, in Zamenhof’s version, traces of the Russian, Polish, German and French translations of the Old Testament, which confirms his use of multiple sources.⁴⁷ In the meantime, Beveridge translated and revised others’ translations against the language versions he was able to read: Ancient Greek, Latin and English. Given Beveridge’s fluency in and passion for Norwegian, he may also have used Bible translations in Norwegian.

In both the Old and New Testaments, these amateur Esperanto translators were keen on translating primarily from the original Hebrew and Ancient Greek texts. Refraining from using European national languages as bridge languages for these translations aimed to reinforce the image of Esperanto as an effective bridge language. The translators were eager to demonstrate that Esperanto could convey nuances of the Holy Scriptures just as effectively as any vernacular language. This emphasis on the original texts brings to the surface intriguing parallels between the Esperanto translation and concurrent approaches to modern Bible translation.

It is worth considering the controversies surrounding what constitutes ‘the original text’ of the New Testament. In the early Christian church, when apostolic letters were sent to congregations or individuals, copies would be made to facilitate the spread of their message. Over time, the work of scribes who copied these texts by hand would inevitably result in both accidental errors – like misspellings, additions and omissions – and intentional changes, some of which would occasionally be reproduced in subsequent copies produced from these versions.⁴⁸ After the invention of the printing press, when printed editions became the norm, several Greek manuscripts of the New Testament already existed, such as the Byzantine, Caesarean and Western texts. Despite the intentions of many translators and commentators to remain faithful to the original, it is difficult to pinpoint precisely what the term ‘original’ refers to, given that multiple ‘originals’ had emerged by the time of the Latin Vulgate and the Ancient Greek Textus Receptus.⁴⁹

In a general sense, it can be argued that scholars and expert theologians devoted to translating the New Testament are concerned primarily with remaining faithful to the original language of the manuscript(s) available to them, aiming to preserve and explore the metaphors and figures of speech contained in the text.⁵⁰ By contrast, religious translators and missionaries tend to focus more on conveying the message itself, prioritising clarity and intelligibility for the purpose of spreading the word of God and facilitating conversion to Christianity.⁵¹

The links between faith and language were not new in John Beveridge’s time. Focusing on the two main religions discussed in this chapter, Judaism became closely tied to the revival of Modern Hebrew as a spoken language, with Modern Hebrew consolidating its role as a unifying element within Jewish communities from the late nineteenth century onward.⁵² Christianity, on the other hand, long associated with Latin, increasingly turned to the systematisation and documentation of indigenous languages as means for spreading the Christian faith throughout the twentieth century.⁵³ Almost paradoxically, Christianity’s global reach drew on vernacular languages of local reach. Between 1900 and 1910 alone, 100 new translations of the Bible or parts thereof were published, followed by another 102 translations in the following decade. In contrast to the Esperanto translation project, these Bible translations were largely undertaken by linguistically well-trained missionaries – many of whom were theologians – with the help of expert language users and native speakers.⁵⁴

The Esperanto translation of the Bible must be understood within this broader framework that connected faith and language with efforts to shape a particular European-inflected perception of what the ‘global’ is – or should be.⁵⁵ The Esperanto Bible is situated somewhere between the scholarly and the missionary paradigms of translation: on the one hand, several members of the Bible Translation Committee sought to spread the word of the Lord, focusing on preserving the message. On the other hand, an overarching goal of the Committee was to, by placing an emphasis on complex metaphors and figures of speech, spread the language of the master – la majstro, as Esperanto speakers occasionally referred to Zamenhof.⁵⁶

Overall, however, the translation project was part and parcel of a much wider form of religious internationalism. In a period that saw the hardening of national borders, Esperanto and its transnational potential were envisioned as means to counter the growing patriotism of the time and foster the globalisation of a faith-based form of brotherhood or fellowship.⁵⁷

In its first step, the Committee had to develop biblical terminology in Esperanto, in an exercise of language co-creation. As the person responsible for collecting all translation drafts, John Rust was particularly concerned with the Committee’s reluctance to coin new vocabulary, as he expressed in a letter to John Beveridge, in English, on 5 October 1909:

They [the Committee members] do not like graco, as it is not found in any authorized dictionary – Boirac has not admitted it into his new dictionary, which, I suppose, will be a standard. At the same time, I find that those who are actually engaged in the work of translating the N.T. [New Testament] are all anxious to have the special word graco, as no one word, nor even several words, can be found to correspond to the several uses of χαρις (e.g. see Coloss. iii.16-iv.6, Heb.x.29 – for difficult uses of χαρις to find an equivalent to).⁵⁸

Rust continues, arguing that the Committee should accept graco because, even though dictionaries did not recognise it, this word had already been used in articles in magazines such as Espero Katolika.

Esperanto dictionaries were one of the key sources of vocabulary the Committee resorted to when deciding whether they needed to coin new terminology. Supportive of further vocabulary development, Rust was adamant that terms in Esperanto such as kredi and fido were acceptable, given how he deemed ‘to believe’ and ‘faith’ as appropriate English equivalents to both the Esperanto kredi and fido and the Greek πιστεύω and πίστη, respectively.

Zamenhof’s words were a point in question. Occasionally, the Committee agreed with Zamenhof’s terms, as Rust asserted: ‘To stumble is falpuŝiĝi. Dr. Z. has settled this for us – Prov.iv.19’.⁵⁹ At other times, Zamenhof’s suggested translations stirred disagreements. The most significant one revolved around the term for ‘God’, as Rust discussed with Beveridge (in English) at length: ‘Perhaps we may persuade him to drop his habit of translating יהוה by Dio which confuses the whole idea of God in the O.T. [Old Testament]’.⁶⁰

This was also a concern for Wackrill – who, in an exchange in English with Rust, portrayed translation issues as divergences between the Jewish and Christian faiths:

… it also appears that the Hebrew language often admits two or more interpretations of the same passage or word, sometimes carrying a considerable diversity of sense. […] And it seems that there exists some anxiety lest Zamenhof should, in such passages, overlook the legitimate claims of Christianity to a rendering which would support the view that the Old Testament is a prophetic foreshadowing of the Christian dispensation.⁶¹

Along these lines, Zamenhof’s translation of ‘God’ was also a bone of contention for Wackrill: ‘… by all means submit a memorial, for his consideration, on the words Elohim and Jehovah’. The translation and faith-related issues that emerged between Zamenhof and the Committee, then, were: first, who has the prerogative of being named Dio in the Esperanto Bible: Elohim, Jehovah (both from the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament) or God (the Christian God in the New Testament)?⁶² Second, if the latter, who would challenge the majstro?

Given the archives available, the answer to the second question above may remain elusive. However, the first question can be partly answered by the outcome of the translation process. Ultimately, Jehovah was translated into Esperanto as Eternulo (the Eternal One). By contrast, Elohim and God were both rendered as Dio – which is consistent with the King James Bible’s use of ‘God’. Zamenhof also expressed his outright disapproval of the use of Sinjoro (Lord) as a trivial and profane way of referring to divine figures.⁶³

Keeping the consistency and interfaith character of the Old and New Testaments was challenging. However, the pace of discussions over letter exchange and these translators’ haste to publish the Esperanto Bible cut these debates short and sealed some disagreements over Jewish and Christian readings of the scriptures. Even so, sincerity in the use of words is a crucial aspect of the Christian faith. Accordingly, if sincerity points to the purity of the relationship between one’s thoughts and words, likewise the translators of the Esperanto Bible faced the challenge of remaining faithful to both the Lord and the majstro.⁶⁴

Ultimately, translating the Old and New Testaments into Esperanto was a paramount endeavour for situating Esperanto in wider imaginaries of modernity. At a time when Catholic missionaries translated the Bible into languages such as Guhu-Samane and brought Christianity to Papua New Guinea,⁶⁵ Dutch Protestants brought Calvinism to places such as the colonial Dutch East Indies.⁶⁶ By overriding local values and religious practices with Christianity, missionaries – largely in line with colonialist practices – perceived their work as paving the way to expanding modernity. Alongside the dissemination of technologies, European languages and Western ‘civilising’ values, this form of modernity was not at odds with faith. Rather, a more globalised and integrated world could also make room for religion.

This finds echoes in Esperanto and its Bible. Just as religious proselytising sought to turn non-Christians into part of global Christendom, Esperanto was perceived as a tool to bring into a global community those who were once relatively isolated in ‘corners’ of the world. In other words, the truth-claims associated with Christianity are meant to be as universal and globalising as the global reach and relevance that Esperanto speakers attached to this language. Hence, going beyond poor translations that had to be redone and disagreements over vocabulary development, the very existence of an Esperanto Bible points to the venture of imagining a global community through a world religion and an international language. With the translation of the Bible and of several secular books, this version of modernity sought to make room for atheism as much as for any religious faith.⁶⁷

A Presbyterian, an Anglican and a Jew walk into a Translation Committee

After three years in the making, the work of the Bible Translation Committee culminated in the publication of the translated New Testament as La Nova Testamento de nia Sinjoro kaj Savanto Jesuo Kristo in 1912.⁶⁸ With the translation of the New Testament becoming available much earlier than the Old Testament, the Committee resorted to several biblical societies to support its publication. Negotiations led by William Page secured the support of the British and Foreign Bible Society, which undertook this publication, whose final revision was carried out by John Rust and Alfred Wackrill.⁶⁹

The Old Testament faced more setbacks to come into being.⁷⁰ On 3 March 1915, Zamenhof sent a letter to Rust – in French this time – eagerly announcing that he had finished his translation:

Cher Monsieur! – J’ai le grand plaisir de pouvoir vous annoncer que l’Ancien Testament est déjà en entier traduit (et écrit à la machine). […] Malheureusement je ne peux pas vous envoyer la traduction à présent, car notre poste n’expédie rien (pendant la guerre) qui est écrit en Esperanto. Par conséquent je suis obligé d’attendre jusqu’à la fin de la guerre.⁷¹

As discussed in Chapter 1, postcards were key for the early materialisations of the Esperanto language community. However, the First World War limited how far words could go via postal services.⁷² Even though the Old Testament had been fully translated, Zamenhof was unable to send the manuscript from the Russian Empire to Britain.⁷³ Writing to Rust in French – which, unlike Esperanto, was permitted by the Russian postal service – Zamenhof conveyed good and bad news about a translation that would only reach the Bible Translation Committee in 1919 – after the war had ended, and two years after Zamenhof’s death.

Between 1919 and 1925, a partly renewed Bible Translation Committee revised Zamenhof’s translation. They put together both the eight books of the Old Testament that had been previously translated by Zamenhof and published with Hachette, and the remaining books received in 1919.⁷⁴ This project of harmonising the language used in the Old and New Testaments⁷⁵ came to fruition in 1926, when both Testaments were at last published together under the title La Sankta Biblio: Malnova kaj Nova Testamentoj tradukitaj el la originalaj lingvoj (The Holy Bible: The Old and New Testaments Translated from the Original Languages).⁷⁶

Key actors behind the endeavour, including John Cyprian Rust and John Beveridge, were still part of the Committee then. They worked alongside old and new Committee members such as William Main Page, H. O. Allbrook, M. J. Elliott, C. Gaydou, T. S. Lindsay, J. E. McFadyen, A. Poynder, E. J. Price and W. Bailey. Of the members, the Scotland-based ones were Beveridge, Page and McFadyen.⁷⁷ Most of these translators were Protestant clergymen from different denominations and all of them were based in Britain. This was one of the reasons why this first translation of the Holy Bible became known as La Londona Biblio (The London Bible).

Interestingly, even though the Bible Translation Committee was entirely made of men, the funds that covered the publication expenses of the 1926 Bible came from two Quaker women: Hannah Priscilla Peckover (1833–1931) and Algerina Peckover (1841–1927).⁷⁸ The sisters followed the translation project from its first steps. Hailing from a wealthy banking family, they not only had the means to financially support the project but also had their own personal interests in seeing the project succeed. Hannah Priscilla Peckover, who learned Esperanto late in life, had a long-standing affiliation with the peace movement and was one of the figureheads behind the Women’s Local Peace Association from the late 1870s. Her own engagement as a Quaker and peace activist certainly resonated with the idea of an international auxiliary language that could allow the spread of the message of peace in the Gospel.⁷⁹

The dedication of the Esperanto Bible took place at the Protestant St Giles’ Cathedral. Located on the Royal Mile in the heart of Edinburgh, this cathedral was also at the heart of the sixteenth-century Scottish Reformation, serving as John Knox’s parish church.⁸⁰ The event took place on 1 August 1926, featuring John Beveridge as one of the four ministers conducting the ceremonial service. This dedication was a prominent event at the Eighteenth Universal Congress of Esperanto held in Edinburgh that summer.

The 1926 London Bible marked the first complete Esperanto translation of the Holy Bible. However, it was not a single, unified translation; rather, it was an assemblage of texts translated from various ‘originals’ and influenced by prior translations into several European languages. Nor was the London Bible the only Holy Bible in Esperanto. Individual Esperanto speakers – particularly those affiliated with the International Union of Catholic Esperantists and the International League of Christian Esperantists – continued to produce essays on religious themes and proposed revised translations of books from both the Old and New Testaments. The most recent complete translation of the Bible into Esperanto was published in 2006 by Gerrit Berveling,⁸¹ a Remonstrant minister and theologian, who drew on the Latin Vulgate and the London Bible to produce his revised translation.⁸²

Translating the scriptures was a means of conveying a certain message both to Esperanto speakers and to the world about how inclusive this constructed language could be. While crafting this message through correspondence exchange, vocabulary development and translation, the individuals behind this project were also developing Esperanto-speaking interfaith networks.

As discussed earlier, translations of the Bible into national and vernacular languages were meant to make the scriptures compelling and intelligible to individuals from specific world regions – as is the case of the missionary work to spread Christianity among indigenous peoples.⁸³ Meanwhile, writing in – or translating into – Esperanto meant addressing a transnational readership, composed of readers from different national and ethnic backgrounds and speakers of different first languages.⁸⁴ An attention to such a diverse readership also meant being mindful of diverse faiths. Ultimately, this translation effort brought together Jews, Catholics and Protestants of several denominations – Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Anglicans and Remonstrants – all the while being funded by Quakers. Such a work, then, involved bridging several religions and denominations, deities that could potentially be called Dio, languages and challenging setbacks concerning cross-border postal services.

Concluding remarks

Postcards may be ephemera, just as perhaps these networks may not have lasted for longer than this immediate collaboration. Yet the book this collaboration produced emerges as a long-standing result of this community-building practice. While Esperanto speakers seemed to ‘simply’ exchange letters, they developed the language, produced knowledge and gave flesh and bones to this language community.

While regular, face-to-face expressions of Esperanto’s internationality were limited to the week-long Universal Congresses of Esperanto, held once a year, communication technologies such as postcards served as a primary means for this community to endure in the long term. Interestingly, all the translation work was carried out via correspondence, and there is no evidence that these translators ever met in person.

In developing vocabulary, these translators also developed Esperanto-speaking interfaith networks, bringing together several religious denominations, languages and religious texts. Even though the process analysed here primarily concerns the Esperanto translations of the Old and New Testaments taking place in the early twentieth century, the revision of scriptures and celebration of Masses in Esperanto continues to date.

Producing this community also involved establishing the connections and reading materials that would, ultimately, give substance to a form of Esperanto-mediated modernity. Such a form of modernity did not have to be secular but would necessarily be global and inclusive, making room for potentially anyone. ‘Anyone’ here is understood as a person that could be anywhere, from any background, and who could learn the language, join the language community, and even – who knows – become Christian. Like Christianity – or science, for that matter – Esperanto was powered by a set of internationalist values that claimed this language’s potential relevance to all human beings – ideas of modernity that were integral to the discourses and imaginaries of early twentieth-century Esperanto speakers.

Notes

1. 1  Émile Boirac, Plena Vortaro Esperanto-Esperanta kaj Esperanto-Franca. Unua Parto (Dijon: Darantière, 1909); Émile Boirac, Plena Vortaro Esperanto-Esperanta kaj Esperanto-Franca. Dua Parto (Dijon: Darantière, 1910).

2. 2  William Allen Smalley, Translation as Mission: Bible Translation in the Modern Missionary Movement (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1991), 33.

3. 3  The booklet in Russian was subsequently translated into French, German, Polish (in 1887) and English (in 1888) – before being revised and published in a multilingual edition in 1905. See Zamenhof, Fundamento.

4. 4  See, for instance, Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, Fundamenta Krestomatio de la Lingvo Esperanto (Paris: Hachette, 1905).

5. 5  Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, Dr. Esperanto’s International Language: Introduction and Complete Grammar, trans. R. H. Geoghegan (Warsaw: self-publication, 1887), page succeeding the title page.

6. 6  In English: ‘No book is as well known throughout the civilised world as the Bible, and if we could show the world that Esperanto has the translation of the entire Bible, this would be a very powerful propaganda tool for us. […] For most of the current cultural languages, the Bible has been the main foundation on which languages have taken the shape of literature and developed; therefore, it will undoubtedly be very important for our language to possess that foundation, with its many words and expressions that have become an elemental necessity for every contemporary cultural language.’ Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, ‘Antaŭparolo al la Genezo’, La Revuo, IV, 1909–10, 337–8.

7. 7  The Jewish Hebrew Bible corresponds roughly to the Protestant Old Testament, with variations based on religious denomination. The Hebrew Bible and the Protestant Old Testament have the same books (chapters), but these are divided differently, such that the former consists of thirty-nine books and the latter has twenty-four. By contrast, the Catholic Bible consists of forty-six books, including the seven Deuterocanonical books that Protestants and Jews regard as apocrypha. The New Testament, on the other hand, is canonical only to the Christian faith and comprises twenty-seven books.

8. 8  The books of the Bible published by Hachette between 1907 and 1914 as separate volumes were: Predikanto (Ecclesiastes), Psalmaro (Psalms), Genezo (Genesis), Eliro (Exodus), Levido (Leviticus), Nombroj (Numbers), Readmono (Deuteronomy) and La sentencoj de Salomono (Proverbs).

9. 9  In English: ‘May those who are religious forgive me that I – being neither a pastor nor a specialist in religious matters – undertook the task of translating a religious work. However, I can absolve myself by explaining that I translated the Psalms not as a religious work but as an important work of humankind’s literature. For purely religious purposes, another translation may appear sooner or later, crafted by clerical specialists.’ Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, La Psalmaro el la Biblio. El la originalo tradukis d-ro L. L. Zamenhof (Paris: Hachette, 1908), 1.

10. 10  E. Neumark, translator, La Libro Ruth (Nuremberg: Presejo de W. Tümmel, 1893).

11. 11  It is worth noting how controversial the term ‘original’ can be regarding the Bible, as we will discuss shortly.

12. 12  W. B. Mielck and F. Stephan, trans, La evangelio Sankta Mateo laŭ Dro Martin Luther (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrich’sche Buchhandlung, 1906).

13. 13  Dia Regno, February 1910, 13.

14. 14  Dia Regno, January 1911, 5.

15. 15  It is worth noting the popularity, among creators and speakers of constructed languages, of the Genesis excerpt about the Tower of Babel.

16. 16  The First Epistle of John was translated into Volapük by Johann Martin Schleyer. See Johann Martin Schleyer, Pened balid Yoliánesà (Konstanz: VOL, 1888).

17. 17  Garvía, Esperanto and Its Rivals, 39.

18. 18  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/151.

19. 19  In English: ‘I undertook that members of the Edinburgh group will translate the Apocalypse, and after the translation is done, I will send it to you for review. Other attendees committed to translate various parts of the New Testament, and I believe the work will be complete before the end of the year.’ John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/151.

20. 20  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36244/19; Ms36244/16.

21. 21  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/163.

22. 22  Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce. ‘List of the Council and Officers for the 145th Session, 1898–9’, The Journal of the Society of Arts 47, no. 2400 (1898), 1–44.

23. 23  Alfred E. Wackrill, Kelkaj impresoj de Hindujo. Literatura almanako (Paris: Presa Esperantista Societo, 1909), 67.

24. 24  See Kökény and Bleier, Enciklopedio.

25. 25  The leaflet was translated, edited and partly authored by John Cyprian Rust, Ordo de Diservo, Laŭ la Preĝlibro de la Angla Eklezio (London: La Tria Kongreso, 1907).

26. 26  Beveridge’s religious and organisational contributions to Esperanto were covered in detail in previous chapters.

27. 27  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/150 and Ms36242/151, respectively.

28. 28  Regarding English, the King James Bible was their key point of comparison.

29. 29  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/162.

30. 30  On the Edinburgh 1910 conference see Brian Stanley, The World Missionary Conference, Edinburgh 1910 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2009); Thomas A. Askew, ‘The New York 1900 Ecumenical Missionary Conference: A Centennial Reflection’. International Bulletin of Missionary Research 24, no. 4 (2000): 146–54.

31. 31  Brian Stanley, ‘Scotland and the World Missionary Conference, Edinburgh 1910’, Records of the Scottish Church History Society 41 (2012): 113–32, here 118–19.

32. 32  Report of Commission I: Carrying the Gospel to all the non-Christian World; with Supplement: Presentation and Discussion of the Report in the Conference on 15th June 1910 (Edinburgh: Publ. for the World Missionary Conference by Oliphant, Anderson & Ferrier, 1910).

33. 33  Report of Commission II: The Church in the Mission Field (Edinburgh: Publ. for the World Missionary Conference by Oliphant, Anderson & Ferrier, 1910).

34. 34  Stanley, The World Missionary Conference, 1–12.

35. 35  See John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/156.

36. 36  See Forster, The Esperanto Movement, 368. Forster advances a similar argument regarding Zamenhof: neither Zamenhof nor the early members of Esperanto’s Language Committee were professional linguists. Regardless of their good intentions and devotion to the language, they were at most amateur linguists and Esperanto enthusiasts.

37. 37  Abigail Green and Vincent Viaene, eds. Religious Internationals in the Modern World: Globalization and Faith Communities since 1750 (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012), 1–2, 14–15.

38. 38  Ulrich Matthias, Esperanto: La nova latino de la Eklezio (Antwerp: Flandra Esperanto-Ligo, 2002).

39. 39  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/163-164.

40. 40  John Beveridge, La Prediko sur la Monto. Tradukis el la originala greka teksto Pastro John Beveridge (London: British Esperanto Association / Edinburgh: Andrew Elliot, 1910).

41. 41  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/170.

42. 42  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/170, Ms36242/181, Ms36242/172, Ms36242/199, Ms36242/245, Ms36242/169 (four from the Russian Empire, one from Tbilisi, and one from Warsaw, the latter sent by Zamenhof), and Ms36242/175 (from Superaguy, Brazil).

43. 43  See, for instance, Dia Regno, June 1910, 47; Amerika Esperantisto, December 1911, 30.

44. 44  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/157.

45. 45  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/159.

46. 46  Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, La Psalmaro el la Biblio. El la originalo tradukis d-ro L. L. Zamenhof (Paris: Hachette, 1908), 1.

47. 47  Douglas Bartlett Gregor, La Esperanta Traduko de la Malnova Testamento: Dek-biblia konkordanco de 518 diskutindaj versoj (Scheveningen: Heroldo de Esperanto, 1958); ‘Arieh ben Guni, Recenzo: La Esperanta traduko de la Malnova Testamento’, Nica literatura revuo 5, no. 5 (1960), 194–7.

48. 48  Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968).

49. 49  Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1971), xv–xxiv.

50. 50  Bruce Metzger, The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001).

51. 51  William Allen Smalley, Translation as Mission: Bible Translation in the Modern Missionary Movement (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1991).

52. 52  Richard E. Wood, ‘A Voluntary, Non-ethnic, Non-territorial Speech Community’, in Sociolinguistic Studies in Language Contact: Methods and Cases, ed. William F. Mackey and Jacob Ornstein (The Hague: Mouton, 1979), 441–2; Liora Halperin, ‘Other Tongues: The Place of Foreign Language in Hebrew Culture’, in Reflections on Knowledge and Language in Middle Eastern Societies, ed. Bruno De Nicola, Yonatan Mendel and Husain Qutbuddin (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010), 228–47.

53. 53  See David Stoll, ‘The Summer Institute of Linguistics and Indigenous Movements’, Latin American Perspectives 9, no. 2 (1982), 84–99; Courtney Handman, Critical Christianity: Translation and Denominational Conflict in Papua New Guinea (Oakland: University of California Press, 2015); Noo Supu, A Triglot Dictionary. Compiled by Dr. Ernest L. Richert and Ttopoqogo Hoopusus (Ukarumpa: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 2002).

54. 54  Smalley, Translation as Mission, 28–9; Frederick Aldridge, The Development of the Wycliffe Bible Translators and the Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1934–1982 (PhD dissertation, University of Stirling, 2012).

55. 55  Green and Viane, Religious Internationals, 1–2.

56. 56  See, for instance, Julio Baghy’s well-known poem titled ‘La Majstro mortis’, on the death of Zamenhof. Julio Baghy, Preter la vivo (Budapest: Literatura Mondo, 1922).

57. 57  Green and Viane, Religious Internationals, 7–8.

58. 58  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/155.

59. 59  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/155.

60. 60  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/157ii.

61. 61  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/159.

62. 62  Michael J. Stahl, The ‘God of Israel’ in History and Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2021), 52–144.

63. 63  Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, ‘Antaŭparolo al la Genezo’, La Revuo, IV, 1909–10, 337–8.

64. 64  Webb Keane, Christian Moderns: Freedom and Fetish in the Mission Encounter (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007).

65. 65  Handman, Critical Christianity.

66. 66  Keane, Christian Moderns.

67. 67  Tomoko Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005); Green and Viaene, Religious Internationals.

68. 68  La Nova Testamento de nia Sinjoro kaj Savanto Jesuo Kristo (London: La Brita kaj Eksterlanda Biblia Societo / Edinburgh and Glasgow: Nacia Biblia Societo de Skotlando, 1912).

69. 69  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36242/168.

70. 70  The Old Testament that Zamenhof translated was the one commonly used by Jews and Protestants, containing thirty-nine books and leaving out the Deuterocanonical books, which both Jews and Protestants regard as apocrypha.

71. 71  In English: ‘Dear Sir, I am very pleased to inform you that the Old Testament has already been fully translated (and typed). […] Unfortunately, I cannot send you the translation at present, as our postal service does not dispatch anything (during the war) written in Esperanto. Consequently, I am obliged to wait until the end of the war.’ See also Public Letter from Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof to John Cyprian Rust, The British Esperantist 11, no. 124 (1915), 66. Ludwig Lejzer Zamenhof, ‘Al pastro J. Cyprian Rust, “Pri la Malnova Testamento”’, in Originala Verkaro, 472.

72. 72  On censorship of Esperanto, and censorship more generally during the war, see O’Keeffe, Esperanto and Languages of Internationalism, 53–8; John T. Smith, ‘Russian Military Censorship during the First World War’, Revolutionary Russia 14, no. 1 (2001): 71–95.

73. 73  A certain M. Fred, who otherwise eludes the record, produced the first translation of some of the Old Testament books that Zamenhof used to ground his own translation. See Zamenhof, ‘Al Pastro J. Cyprian Rust’, in Originala Verkaro, 472.

74. 74  Thomas Creusot, L’utopie sous presse. Éditer l’espéranto en France (1897–1939) (Master’s dissertation, École nationale des chartes, 2022).

75. 75  Gregor, La Esperanta Traduko, 43.

76. 76  La Sankta Biblio: Malnova kaj Nova Testamentoj tradukitaj el la originalaj lingvoj (London: Brita kaj Alilanda Biblio Societo / Edinburgh and Glasgow: Nacia Biblia Societo de Skotlando, 1926).

77. 77  John Beveridge Collection, Ms36244/19.

78. 78  See Matthias, Esperanto; Garvía, Esperanto and Its Rivals, 110.

79. 79  Heloise Brown, The Truest Form of Patriotism: Pacifist Feminism in Britain, 1870–1902 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003), 79–98.

80. 80  Michael Lynch, ‘John Knox, Minister of Edinburgh and Commissioner of the Kirk’, in John Knox and the British Reformations, ed. Roger Mason (London: Routledge, 2018), 242–67.

81. 81  Geoffrey Greatex, ‘Translations of Virgil into Esperanto’, in Virgil and His Translators, ed. Susanna Braund and Zara Martirosova Torlone (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), 124–35.

82. 82  Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof, Gerrit Berveling, John Cyprian Rust, John Beveridge and C. G. Wilkinson, trans., Biblio (Dobřichovice: Kava-Pech, 2006).

83. 83  See Handman, Critical Christianity; Keane, Christian Moderns.

84. 84  Ian Richmond, ‘Esperanto Literature and the International Reader’, in Aspects of Internationalism: Language and Culture, ed. Ian Richmond (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993), 103–18; Kevin Grieves, ‘Esperanto Journalism and Readers as “Managers”: A Transnational Participatory Audience’. Media History 27, no. 1 (2020): 1–13.