We should pay more attention to what we can learn and practice rathern than wasting time in thinking if Rama is an Aryan or a Drawidian. We our selves (each of us) not sure of our origin. India was once most flurishing country to which may ethinic backgroungs (like present US) came to dwell in. We had very mixed and highly evolved civilization. So how can you say if which one is aryan, drawidian, indian, american, african …Please don’t try to loose the essence of Ramayana which is veda itself, please don’t devoid yourself of the values it is bestowing. We should be grateful that such writing is still avaialable for us to read.

I will quote this for all great works even if written in Nothern Pole or Southern Pole, knowledge of any kind is blessing to me ..

What about all the places mentioned in the Ramayana.
All places mentioned in the Ramayan can be found today and are similar to the descriptions found in Ramayana.
The places mentioned in Ramayana and Ramcharitmanas eg. Ayodhya, Sri Lanka are real places and the journey of Rama from Ayodhya to Sri Lanka, as depicted, appears to be real.

What about the Bridge?
Lord Rama, Lakshman, Hanuman and all of their monkey friends/soldiers built a stone bridge from South India to Sri Lanka. Nasa Scientists have discovered (some time ago) the bridge that Rama had built is really there, exactly where the story says it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam’s_Bridge

Some real Ramayana pictures can be found at
http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=859912

A ruler is prone to comments from all quarters.

And to react to comments is not intelligent action, for any human being; more so for a ruler!

To forsake the subjects and retreat to forests, itself was a callous move for any caring ruler.

Perhaps it is great move from the point of view of Rama, as a son of Dashrath. But he forfeits his responsibility to rule over Ayodhya simply by forsaking his city and its citizens.

And where does Ram Rajya and royal dharma fit within all this?

He was incapable of protecting his wife, knowing fully well about the magical deer that roamed and enticed her.

And to reclaim his one woman, he waged a battle that saw many women, become widows with broken homes.

And even after that his wife had to come through fire to prove her purity.

And in spite of all this, he again banished the pregnant woman and abandoned her in a forest.

To top it all, he again lost his sacrificial horse, waged a battle with his own sons, and saw his army decimated and defeated.

Upon knowing that the boys were his own progeny, he wanted the guys to leave their mother and accompany him home to live as his sons.

How much more can a sensible woman take from a husband?

The vexed woman took her life in landscape terrains, after the continued shoddy treatment.

And historians poetically brought in ‘mother earth’ the Bhumi Devi.

It is a tradition even today that Valmiki’s Uttara kanda is not to be read in homes.

One who wishes to browse Uttara kanda has to stay in a temple, finish reading, have a cleansing bath, feed the poor and only then return home.

So much for Ram and Maryada Purushottam’s intelligent, sensitive life!

It’s highly debatable whether Valimiki himself wrote Uttarakaanda because basic character of Rama doesn’t fit into the character depicted in previous kaandas. I also referred http://www.valmikiramayan.net recently, though it’s somewhat an abridged version, you can see that Rama gets into deeply pensive and suicidal moods just because of few months of separation from his ladylove. Valmiki captured these feelings very touchingly in aranya kaanda and kishkindha kaanda. It appears that his character as a lover puts even the best of lovers to shame. Few other inconsistent points which come to my mind regarding Uttara kaanda : when Rama could not bear few months of separation, how could he tolerate years of separation from her? Yes, ramayan indicates that he did not enjoy the kingdom pleasures during that time and psychologically he was as devastated as Sita was but based on his character represented in previous kaandas, he or lakhmana or hanuma would have attempted to find her welfare atleast through spies, especially knowing that she was pregnant ! How could he wait till Lava and Kusa were born and brought up to be great warriors and singers (child prodigies?) and their union with them only after fight with them? In this kaanda, I think he receives few positive points as a king but loses more points as a lover and husband but again gains few positive points by rejecting second marriage (very much prevailing system at that time) and kingdom pleasures in the absence of Seeta. Though I still very much like his character as an idealist, as an ordinary man with modern outlook, I strongly oppose his great misdeeds to Seeta and certainly add those points I deduct from Rama to Seeta.

An off-line thought from my side: I don’t think many Indians including myself accept the western inflamed Aryan theory. Sri Rama and Seeta were as much native Indians as we are ! And I also do not believe that the epic was based on historical facts because many of the psychological and physical feats depicted in the epic are very super-human. How do we reconcile these points – mystery of Seeta’s birth still un-resolved in the epic ? talking monkeys ? power of Rama’s arrows and lord of ocean’s personal appearance to him ? curses, one of which keeps Ravana away from abusing Seeta physically ? detailed description of the events as if Valmiki saw them all himself ? flying chariots ? demons with illusory powers ? monkey changing its size at will from thumb to mountain sizes ? lords, their boons and curses ? monkey crossing the great ocean in few jumps ? constructing a bridge across a great ocean in few months ? great power of Rama’s arrows, even ordinary arrows capable of piercing seven saala trees with mighty trunks and return to his quiver ? his ever-replenished quivers ? ideal king/husband/son/lover? ideal brother(s) ? ideal and perfect wife ? ideal devotee? adding characters in uttara kaanda, highly accomplished singer & warrior child prodigies ? and many more points. Valmiki’s imagination was too ideal, his quest for great ideals being served only in his epic. I believe that Ramayan was a great literary fiction, not anything historical except for possibly few things like names of the places.

Ramayana is only a eulogised biography of an Aryan invader-king.