LAYERED KINGSHIP AND TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY IN GHANA:A HISTORICAL, LINGUISTIC, LEGAL, AND POLITICAL ANALYSIS BY MASTER DENNIS EYIRAM SEGBENE XENODZI

LAYERED KINGSHIP AND TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY IN GHANA:
A HISTORICAL, LINGUISTIC, LEGAL, AND POLITICAL ANALYSIS

By
Dennis Eyiram Segbene Xenodzi

A Thesis Submitted to the
Institute of African Studies
University of Ghana, Legon

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Award of the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
in African Studies (Law and Political Science)


ABSTRACT

This doctoral thesis examines the institution of chieftaincy in Ghana and argues that it is substantively a system of layered kingship. It demonstrates that divisional chiefs function as kings within their respective jurisdictions of reign, while paramount chiefs function as Kings of Kings exercising recognized overlordship. The study interrogates the colonial introduction of the term “chief” and establishes that it is an administrative label that does not diminish indigenous sovereignty.

Using qualitative methods—historical analysis, legal pluralism, linguistic study, and political anthropology—the research shows that pre-colonial Ghanaian governance systems were sovereign, federated, and hierarchically coordinated without negating local autonomy. The study further incorporates auto-ethnographic material, conservatively framed, to demonstrate how African kingship integrates spiritual legitimacy and customary installation.

The findings contribute to African political thought, legal interpretation, and policy formulation by restoring conceptual accuracy to Ghanaian traditional governance.



**CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION**

1.1 Background of the Study

Before colonial intervention, the societies that now form Ghana were governed by indigenous political systems rooted in kingship. Titles such as Ohene, Mantse, Fia, Naa, and Torgbi denoted sovereign authority. These rulers exercised jurisdiction over land, law, ritual, and governance.

Colonial administration collapsed these nuanced systems into the single term “chief,” creating a lasting conceptual distortion. This thesis challenges that distortion.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Despite constitutional recognition, Ghanaian traditional rulers are often perceived as subordinate figures rather than sovereign authorities. This misperception undermines governance, legal clarity, and cultural dignity.

1.3 Objectives

Establish divisional chiefs as kings of jurisdiction

Establish paramount chiefs as Kings of Kings

Demonstrate the colonial origin of the term “chief”

Align chieftaincy with African political philosophy


1.4 Research Questions

What constituted kingship in pre-colonial Ghana?

How did colonial administration reclassify kingship?

How does Ghanaian law support layered sovereignty?


1.5 Significance

The study restores historical accuracy, strengthens governance discourse, and contributes to African political theory.


CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND DEFINITION OF KINGSHIP**

Kingship is defined as sovereign authority over territory, people, law, and ritual. In African political thought, sovereignty is layered, not singular. Divisional rulers possess autonomous kingship; paramount rulers possess overlordship.

The study employs:

Political anthropology

Legal pluralism

Linguistic analysis


CHAPTER THREE

**PRE-COLONIAL GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN GHANA**

Pre-colonial Ghana operated federated systems of kingship. Divisional kings governed towns and territories, while paramount kings coordinated defense, diplomacy, and inter-jurisdictional order. Authority was sacred, hereditary, and legally grounded.


**CHAPTER FOUR

COLONIAL RECLASSIFICATION AND THE TERM “CHIEF”**

The British colonial administration introduced “chief” for administrative convenience. This reclassification reduced kings to functionaries in colonial perception but did not alter indigenous sovereignty. The term persists today as a linguistic legacy, not a factual descriptor.

**CHAPTER FIVE

DIVISIONAL CHIEFS AS KINGS OF JURISDICTION**

Divisional rulers exercise:

Land authority

Judicial power

Ritual leadership

Governance autonomy


Their installation rites, symbols, and authority meet all criteria of kingship.


**CHAPTER SIX

PARAMOUNT CHIEFS AS KINGS OF KINGS**

Paramount rulers exercise overlordship over multiple kings. Their authority is coordinative and symbolic, not administrative domination. This aligns with global concepts of High Kingship.


**CHAPTER SEVEN

LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE TERM “CHIEF”**

Indigenous languages do not distinguish “chief” from “king.” Colonial English terminology introduced a false hierarchy. Linguistic restoration is essential for conceptual clarity.


**CHAPTER EIGHT

CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS**

The 1992 Constitution protects chieftaincy without defining it as non-kingly. Legal pluralism allows customary sovereignty to coexist with the modern state.


**CHAPTER NINE

IMPLICATIONS AND AUTO-ETHNOGRAPHIC CASE STUDY**

9.6 Dual Installation of King Xenodzi (Auto-Ethnographic Analysis)

2002: A self-reported spiritual experience interpreted as divine installation as King of the Off-Chain Throne, framed as belief narrative.

2020: Formal enstoolment at Klikor by HRM Fiaga Addo VIII as Torgbi Xenodzi Dogbey II, Dufia of Worgbato-Klikor.


This reflects African kingship’s dual legitimacy: spiritual calling and customary ratification.


**CHAPTER TEN

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS**

The study confirms:

Divisional chiefs are kings

Paramount chiefs are Kings of Kings

“Chief” is a colonial misnomer

Recommendations:

Curriculum reform

Policy recognition of layered kingship

Judicial interpretive clarity


VIVA VOCE DEFENSE (SUMMARY NOTES)

Core Defense:
“This thesis distinguishes between nomenclature and substance. Chiefs are kings in substance, irrespective of colonial terminology.”

Key Concepts to Emphasize:

Layered sovereignty

Legal pluralism

Charismatic and customary legitimacy

POST-PhD POLICY FRAMEWORK

Title

Recognizing Layered Kingship in Ghana

Proposals:

Dual terminology in state documents

Educational curriculum updates

Formal advisory roles for traditional rulers


BOOK PROPOSAL

Title: Kings Beneath the Crown
Theme: Restoring African political truth
Audience: Scholars, policy makers, traditional authorities


KEYNOTE SPEECH

Chiefs or Kings? Restoring Truth to Ghana’s Traditional Authority

“Before the colonial word ‘chief’ was spoken on our land, our rulers were kings. They governed land, judged cases, led rituals, and embodied sovereignty. No borrowed word can erase that truth.”


Closing:

“When a people remember who their rulers truly are, they govern with dignity, clarity, and strength.”