In response to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s recent remarks on the role of Indian princely states during the British colonial era, members of India’s erstwhile royal families have expressed their displeasure, condemning his statements as a misrepresentation of history. Gandhi, in an opinion piece published in The Indian Express, criticized what he called “pliant Maharajas” who, he claimed, succumbed to the East India Company’s coercive influence, enabling colonial exploitation and the monopolization of Indian resources. His comments have ignited strong backlash from royal descendants, who argue that his portrayal oversimplifies their ancestors’ struggles and sacrifices.

Union Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia, a descendant of the royal family of Gwalior, took to X (formerly Twitter) to address Gandhi’s comments. Scindia accused Gandhi of harboring “selective amnesia” about his own privileges and implied that the Congress leader’s criticism disregards the resilience of many Indian royals who resisted colonial pressures. “Your selective amnesia about your own privilege is a disservice to those truly striving against adversity,” Scindia wrote. “Rahul Gandhi is no champion of Atmanirbhar Bharat; he is merely a product of an outdated entitlement.”

Other royal descendants echoed similar sentiments. Diya Kumari, Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister and granddaughter of Jaipur’s last Maharaja, denounced Gandhi’s statements as an “attempt to malign” the royal families. She emphasized that Gandhi’s narrative neglected the role of the royals in preserving Indian culture and traditions.

Vikramaditya Singh, the grandson of the last Maharaja of Kashmir, and a former Congress leader himself, criticized Gandhi’s understanding of history as “superficial.”

Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar, a member of Udaipur’s 1,500-year-old royal lineage, defended the contributions of his ancestors, asserting that they had long been defenders of the people, playing pivotal roles in shaping India’s social and cultural landscape. Chaitanya Raj Singh of the Jaisalmer royal family further condemned Gandhi’s portrayal as “baseless,” emphasizing that his family and others had upheld “dharma” and served their communities selflessly.

Shrimant Gayatri Raje Puar, a BJP leader and widow of the late Maharaja of Dewas Senior, accused Gandhi of undermining the Sanatan Sanskriti values which many royals had defended at great personal cost. “Ignoring this legacy disrespects our heritage,” she said. Similarly, Yaduveer Wadiyar, a royal scion from Mysore, remarked that Gandhi’s criticism only displayed his “lack of knowledge” about the historical complexities involved.

In his opinion piece, Gandhi had drawn parallels between the East India Company’s monopolistic practices and contemporary corporate monopolies, warning of a similar economic stranglehold by modern oligarchs. Gandhi argued that India’s institutions have become subservient to these monopolists, resulting in job losses and increased inequality. In a message on X, he framed the choice as between “Play-Fair or Monopoly? Jobs or Oligarchies?” and advocated for a “New Deal” that would empower Indian businesses against monopolistic practices.

While Gandhi’s op-ed sparked discussions on economic reforms, it has simultaneously reignited debates around India’s colonial history and the nuanced roles played by the princely states during British rule.