The popular belief that the 1887 Education Ordinance was designed for the collective upliftment of the people of the Gold Coast must be revisited — and firmly rejected. Far from being a benevolent educational reform, the 1887 ordinance was a political weapon, crafted in the aftermath of the 1874 Anglo–Asante War, to weaken the authority of indigenous leadership, suppress potential revolts, and consolidate British domination over the newly declared Crown Colony.
This policy was not born out of a desire to educate the African child. It was a calculated response to a war that had shaken the foundations of British control. After the destruction of Kumasi in 1874, Governor William Brandford Griffith and his administration recognised that the greatest threat to British rule did not come merely from military confrontation — it came from the traditional political structures that commanded deep loyalty among the local population, particularly among the Asante and the Ga-Adangbe.
A Tool of Political Control, Not National Progress
Christian missions were rapidly expanding inland after 1874, building schools that served religious and political interests rather than national development. Instead of reigning in denominational rivalries, racial discrimination, and uneven teaching standards, the British chose to weaponise education as a means to reshape local loyalties.
The 1887 Ordinance gave the impression of progress — grants, inspections, certified teachers, and “open admission.” But behind the fine print was a clear colonial intention:
To break the backbone of traditional authority by controlling how the next generation of Gold Coasters thought, learned, and identified themselves.
Education was deliberately designed to dilute the influence of chiefs, erase indigenous cultural confidence, and replace traditional authority with loyalty to the British Crown.
Targeting Asante and Ga-Adangbe Influence
Both the Asante and Ga-Adangbe systems represented formidable centres of political and cultural power. Their chieftaincy structures were sophisticated, deeply respected, and capable of mobilising resistance.
The British understood this.
Thus, “education reform” became a quiet but potent weapon:
• English education replaced communal civic structures.
• Christian doctrine challenged indigenous spiritual authority.
• State-regulated schooling undermined chief-led socialisation.
• “Open admission” and “no forced religious instruction” were tools to limit the authority of chiefs over their own subjects.
By inserting government rules deep into mission schools — the most influential institutions of the time — Britain ensured that the formation of thought, culture, and identity among the youth of the Gold Coast would serve colonial interests rather than indigenous unity.
A Direct Fallout of the 1874 War
Make no mistake: the 1887 reform did not occur in a vacuum. It was the political child of the Anglo–Asante War.
The war terrified the British because it demonstrated that Africans could organise, unify, and resist.
Thus, after defeating the Asante, the Crown no longer relied solely on force. It turned to something far more effective and lasting:
Control the mind, and you control the people.
Control education, and you erase resistance before it begins.
Not a Unifying Reform — A Divisive Strategy
The 1887 ordinance was not intended to unify the people of the Gold Coast. It was designed to keep them manageable.
Mission schools were prohibited from discriminating by religion or race not out of moral virtue, but because the British feared that:
• Divided communities could rally behind chiefs,
• Denominational conflict could strengthen anti-colonial alliances,
• Exclusion could empower traditional leadership over converts and non-converts.
Thus, the goal was not equality. The goal was neutralisation.
Why the Modern Narrative Must Be Corrected
Today, many educational commentaries treat the 1887 ordinance as a positive step toward modernisation. This narrative is not only misleading — it sanitises the truth of colonial manipulation.
For the ordinary Gold Coaster in 1887:
• The ordinance did not improve access in any meaningful way.
• It did not respect indigenous knowledge systems.
• It did not enhance community cohesion.
• It did not empower local leadership.
Instead, it systematically weakened the structures that held African societies together.
A Call to Reject the Colonial Myth
We must stop glorifying the 1887 Education Ordinance as progressive or benevolent. It was strategic colonial governance, designed to preserve British power by undermining traditional authority and shaping the identity of future generations.
The idea that this was “good for Ghanaians” is historically inaccurate and intellectually dishonest.
True national development cannot be rooted in policies built on domination.
True education must grow from the people, their culture, their knowledge systems, and their collective aspirations — not from foreign interests seeking control.
It is time to confront the truth and reclaim our own narrative.
Writer: Nana Ofori Owusu
