Don T. wrote:

> Also, I can't think of many examples of support by religious groups.
> There is, of course, the famous example of Baha'ism and Esperanto, which
> dates from the 1920s (I believe), but never went anywhere.

Baha'i endorsement of Esperanto actually preceded WW1, but 'Abdu'l-Baha also stated that 
Esperanto would have to be revised, because it was too difficult for some people. 

As recounted in Wendy Heller's biography, Zamenhof's daughter Lidia (who was a Baha'i) often 
heard requests for a revision when she lectured in Europe and America during the 1930s.

However, she was either unable or unwilling to make the necessary arrangements - so the major 
impediments for non-linguists of certain nationalities remained. 

Unfortunately, the concept of a language effectively constrained by a central committee loyal to 
the ideas of a sole author wasn't conducive to the aftermath of WW2 - popularly seen as a 
potentially democratic era after "The Age of the Dictators". English having discovered a second 
wind via the victory of the Allies, Esperanto gradually lost the high media profile that had given it 
"household word" status during the 20s and 30s - a trend reinforced by Orwell's "Newspeak" and a 
perceived association with Red China and other totalitarian regimes.

Anyway, 'Abdu'l-Baha, evidently knowing in advance that a satisfactory reform of Esperanto would 
never take place, also specified before WW1 that a new language should be formed by an 
international committee - and that the hopes of Esperantists would be realised in this way.  

Antony Alexander