Professor H. H. Wilson to doubt the generally accepted identification of Asoka with the Priyadarsi who published the edicts.[1] The learned professor rests his scepticism on the following grounds, which it is necessary to examine in detail, out of respect for one who has rendered such distinguished services in every branch of Indian literature.
1st. "It is doubtful whether the edicts of Priyadarsi have any connection with Buddhism, the meaning of the inscriptions, to say the least, being equivocal." Again, "There is nothing in the injunctions promulgated that is decidedly and exclusively characteristic of Buddhism."[2]
2nd. The total omission of any allusion to Buddha himself by any of his appellations, Sugata, Tathágata, Gautama, or Sákya.[3]
3rd. The identification (of Asoka with Priyadarsi) rests upon a passage in the Dipawanso, "a work of rather doubtful character," which is besides a composition of the fourth century of our era.[3]
4th. "It seems very inexplicable, why in none of the inscriptions his own appellation Asoka, or Dharmasoka, should ever be mentioned."[4]
5th. Chronological difficulties of which it is not easy to dispose.[5]
