Sogdiana

       There is always the tendency when speaking about ancient people to conflate language with ethnicity. This is very problematic. The idea that "the language makes the people" is a fairly recent one, an ideology about language that really only emerged during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in Europe. This concept was used in two ways. First, it was used to legitimate and facilitate national unification, as in the case of Bismarckian Germany. On the other hand, it was used as a rallying cry for the liberation of subjugated people, such as the Hungarians striving for independence from the Austrian-Hapsburg Empire. In either case, language and ethnicity were imagined as the constitutive elements for the centralized European nation-state. This political architecture is historically and geographically specific, and in no way should it be extended conceptually to include ancient civilizations. I fear that as a result of the fragmentary nature of the historical record, and the brevity of Wood, Marshak, and Negmatov's treatment, the "Sogdians" have been partially misconstrued. 
        Who exactly are we talking about when we speak of the "Sogdians"? They appear to have been a semi-nomadic group of traders operating across the central stretch of the Silk Road, sharing some sort of affiliation with the city state of Samarkand. Our readings claim that they were at some points Buddhist, Zoroastrian, and Manichean in their religious outlook. Their art-form is likewise eclectic incorporating both style and subject matter from a host of other traditions. By all accounts the Sogdians were a varied group.
       All of this evidence would seem to imply that the "Sogdian" identity, constructed here by our readings over the course of a few centuries, was not as centralized as the type of nationalized identities we are familiar with today. Apparently, many other people could speak Sogdian: were these people in some way Sogdian as well? Some Sogdians became Chinese citizens: were they still Sogdians? How could the Sogdians living and trading with the Indian peoples be considered the same as those living so far away in Turfan? My question is, what - if any - were the decisive characteristics that made someone a Sogdian?
       I do not wish to imply that "the Sogdians" never existed as a unified concept; I am only seeking to problematize this week's rendering of that concept. Perhaps my concerns have already been addressed through intricate scholarship too specialized to include in a survey course. It would be very interesting to see what kinds of geographical and temporal subdivisions existed within - and were important for -  the Sogdian peoples.