Well,so far the great epic has been believed to be a Mythology with a lot of reality by all the worshipers of Lord Rama. The undelievable things like ten heads of Ravana, Kumbhakarna sleeping through half of his life and other demons or any unbelievable stuff was accepted as an exaggeration of a true story by many people amongst the Hindus.  The latest series by Amish  Tripathi... 'The Ram Chandra Series' of which the first one The Scion of Ikshvaku  (which released recently) is written in a believable way...A compelling, engrossing read..I'm now waiting for the second book 

I agree. These facts depicting like Ravan with 10 heads  make people believe that Ramayan is just another mythology. Anyhow, now the new revelation according to the link vouches that Ramayana really happened. Now for the time being we have to believe until another solid proof comes with which negatives the claim  given in the link.

It's essential to read the link article before we jump to conclusions.

Ramayana is definitely a true story but as it got passed down through generations there are bound to be some exaggerations... It is both History and Mythology since it forms part of Hindu culture and belief.However, personally I have always liked Mahabharat better because of its vast canvas and the intricacy of the plot ...

It's true, over a period Ramayana has undergone several changes. Another aspect is Ramayana written by Valmiki and Kamba there are lot of differences. But what I feel with the advanced technology there are a plethora of devices which can find out the authenticity of these mythologies.

Ramayana is an evic written by Valmiki in Sanskrit. There are many other versions in various languages, differing in many respects.  This is not history. The link is by 'speaking tree' which is a religious/ spiritual platform.  There is no authentic historian who may clarify whether Ramayana is real history. 

Yes. The link is by Speaking tree. But the opinions expressed by Speaking tree are not it's own. The link quotes Historian's point of view. Anyhow it's up to the opinions of the members. I neither accept it or deny it. I'm neutral. If any esteemed member negatives, they are free to express their opinions.

It is possible that Valmiki wrote Ramayana based on a true story in real life, in which the author himself was a character. To satisfy the mystical nature and sentiments of the human mind, he had added many exaggerations and included superhuman characters and miraculous acts. It is a beautiful and unparalleled epic in Sanskrit that induced morality in Hindu community, and had its different versions written by several scholars. That is fine. But, in real life, I cannot imagine the colossal image of a ten-headed giant, or a person flying thought the air holding a huge mountain on his one hand, etc., except with a childish innocence and excitement. Just by linking certain places and things to the incidents of a story very cleverfully using the words “it is believed to be”, we cannot convert a story into history. 

Absolutely. In Any depiction be it History or mythology the author adds a bit of dramatic element to make the readers absorb in the story. Without this the reader is bound to be thrown into the realms of boredom. The post is intended for discussion and invite opinions fro our readers.

As far as I'm concerned I prefer to be neutral. I do not take sides.

There are many versions of Ramayan and in Odia too Sarla Das wrote and he localised all incidents. There is no way one could know whether it really happens or not but it is believe that matters. Other epics such as Illiad and Odessey too impressed by those times. It is a fine line but as per link there are some inconclusive indications.

Ramayana has different version which vary to a large extent with each other. And in the version of Ramayana  written by Kambar, Ravan is worshiped not Rama. Seeing all these variations one certainly will doubt the veracity of Ramayan.