1. The idea that the Ramayana is "always already" in India and South-east Asia is interesting. I suppose you could compare that to how Christian stories and Greek epics are always already present in stories found in European languages. These stories guide cultures and religions through daily life, even without the individuals thinking about it. The Ramayana gives a story that in many ways gives application to dharma.
2. The idea that Rama does not realize he is a god is interesting. It seems that Rama's non-recognition may be similar to the idea of maya, or 'illusion'. Even a god is not fully out of the grasp of the illusion of duality. Rama is then brought to the realization that he is Rama and a god, uniting two seemingly opposite poles into one.
3. The orientalist view that Indians could not write history is also confounding seeing as the first 'history' book that I can think of is Herodotus' Histories, a book that, like the orientalist view of Indian stories, is filled with gods and monsters.