The release of the new web series The Royals, featuring Bollywood actors Ishaan Khatter and Bhumi Pednekar, has stirred not just interest but also serious controversy. While audiences were expecting a regal drama filled with grandeur, history, and modern-day monarchy intrigue, a royal voice from the heart of Gujarat has raised concerns over the show’s authenticity and portrayal of Indian royalty.
Maharani Radhikaraje Gaekwad of Baroda, one of the most prominent figures from India’s former princely families, has come forward criticizing the series for what she calls a “deeply insensitive” and “poorly researched” representation of India’s royal heritage.
Let’s dive into what the controversy is about, what the Maharani said, and why The Royals has become the center of a heated cultural and historical debate.
🎬 What is ‘The Royals’ About?
The Royals is a fictional series set in the contemporary world of India’s elite royal families. It attempts to showcase the power struggles, secrets, scandals, and politics that unfold within palaces long after India officially abolished royal privileges in 1971.
Ishaan Khatter plays a young royal navigating responsibility, fame, and politics, while Bhumi Pednekar plays a powerful character with modern ideals who challenges traditional norms.
The series has been marketed as a “modern Indian monarchy drama,” blending family conflict, political ambition, and emotional intrigue.
👑 Maharani Radhikaraje Gaekwad’s Objection
Soon after the trailer and initial episodes of The Royals were released, Maharani Radhikaraje Gaekwad took to social media and public statements to strongly object to the portrayal of royal families in the show.
Here are the key points she raised:
1. Historical Inaccuracy
The Maharani pointed out that the series loosely borrows names, symbols, and traditions from real royal lineages—particularly those of Baroda—but portrays them in an entirely fictional and often disrespectful manner. This, she says, amounts to cultural appropriation and insensitive storytelling.
2. Misrepresentation of Indian Royals
In her words, The Royals “reduces centuries of tradition, sacrifice, and public service to tabloid-like scandal.” She emphasized that many royal families today play important roles in heritage preservation, philanthropy, and education, none of which are acknowledged in the show.
3. No Consultation or Consent
Perhaps the most serious allegation was that no consultation was made with real royal families, despite the show seemingly drawing inspiration from them. The Maharani argued that if filmmakers wish to fictionalize history, they must take creative responsibility seriously.
📢 What Did Radhikaraje Say Exactly?
In a powerful Instagram post and a follow-up interview, the Maharani said:
“This is not just lazy storytelling. This is an erasure of legacy and a distortion of living history. We are not characters in someone’s imagination — we are custodians of a real past and present.”
She further added that The Royals paints an “orientalist fantasy” of Indian royalty, filled with clichés — the arrogant prince, the scheming queen, the lavish palace — without acknowledging the dignity, discipline, and modern contributions of real royal families.
🎭 How Ishaan Khatter and Bhumi Pednekar Have Responded
As of now, neither Ishaan Khatter nor Bhumi Pednekar has officially responded to the Maharani’s comments. However, insiders from the production have said that the series is “purely fictional” and “not meant to depict any real family or state.”
The creators have also mentioned that The Royals is about class, privilege, and identity in contemporary India, not a biography of any specific family.
But that defense hasn’t calmed the growing criticism from historians, cultural experts, and members of other erstwhile royal households.
🏛️ Why This Controversy Matters
This isn’t just a celebrity versus royalty issue — it’s a larger question about how India’s cultural heritage is represented in modern media.
📌 1. Freedom of Expression vs. Responsibility
While creators have artistic freedom, that freedom also comes with a responsibility to represent communities, traditions, and histories with care, especially in a country as diverse as India.
📌 2. Relevance of Royal Families Today
Many Indians today are unaware of the current roles played by royal descendants — running schools, restoring forts, supporting rural communities. Fictional portrayals can skew public understanding, especially for international audiences.
📌 3. Narratives of Power and Gender
Interestingly, Maharani Radhikaraje’s voice in this debate is also important from a feminist lens — as a woman of legacy using her platform to call out misrepresentation and demand dignity.
🎥 Impact on the Show’s Popularity
Despite the criticism, The Royals has garnered attention for its production quality, bold characters, and high-voltage drama. However, many viewers are now watching it with a more critical eye, comparing fiction to facts.
Some fans have taken to social media asking for a disclaimer at the beginning of each episode, while others are demanding that the creators engage in open dialogue with historians and cultural custodians.
📚 The Need for Authentic Storytelling
This controversy underlines the need for more thoughtful, well-researched storytelling in Indian cinema and OTT. With global audiences watching Indian content more than ever, the stakes are higher — not just for entertainment but also for cultural respect and narrative accuracy.
If a show like The Royals wishes to explore modern-day aristocracy, it must do so with balance — celebrating legacy while also critiquing privilege, not mocking it.
🧭 Conclusion: Between Drama and Dignity
The Royals may have brought palace intrigue and regal drama to the screen, but it has also opened the gates to a real-world conversation about representation, responsibility, and the line between fact and fiction.
Maharani Radhikaraje Gaekwad’s criticism is a reminder that storytelling doesn’t exist in a vacuum. When you tap into legacy and living heritage, it’s more than just creative content — it becomes a reflection of identity, pride, and history.
As audiences and creators, we must ask: Is it worth the drama if it comes at the cost of dignity?