hat they usually preserve names
and genealogies correctly but distort facts, and fantastically combine
independent narratives. Rama was a semi-divine hero in the tales of
ancient Oudh, based on a real personality, and Ceylon was colonized by
Indians of Aryan speech.[362] But can we assume that a king of Oudh
really led an expedition to the far south, with the aid of ape-like
aborigines? It is doubtful, and the narrative of the Ramayana reads
like poetic invention rather than distorted history. And yet, what can
have prompted the legend except the occurrence of some such
expedition? In Rama's wife Sita, seem to be combined an agricultural
goddess and a heroine of ancient romance, embodying the Hindu ideal of
the true wife.

We have no record of the steps by which Rama and Krishna were
deified, although in different parts of the epic they are presented in
very different aspects, sometimes as little more than human, sometimes
as nothing less than the Supreme Deity. But it can hardly be doubted
that this deification owes something to the example of Buddhism. It
may be said that the development of both Buddhism and Hinduism in the
centuries immediately preceding and following our era gives parallel
manifestations of the same popular tendency to deify great men. This
is true, but the non-Buddhist forms of Indian religion while not
objecting to deification did not particularly encourage it. But in
this period, Buddhism and Jainism were powerful: both of them
sanctioned the veneration of great teachers and, as they did not
recognize sacrifice or adoration of gods, this veneration became the
basis of their ceremonies and easily passed into worship. The
Buddhists are not responsible for the introduction of deification, but
the fact that it was to some extent the basis of their public
ceremonies must have gone far to make the worship of Rama and
Krishna seem natural.

It is commonly said that whereas the whole divine nature of Vishnu
was embodied in Krishna, Rama was only a partial incarnation. Half
the god's essence took human form in him, the other half being
distributed among his brothers. Krishna is a greater figure in
popular esteem and receives the exclusive devotion of more
worshippers. The name of Rama commands the reverence of most Hindus,
and has a place in their prayers, but his figure has not been invested
with the attributes (often of dubious moral value) which most attract
sectarian devotion. His worship combines