Voices of River and Lake: NSW Before 1788

The archaeological record of pre‑European New South Wales is a landscape written in stone, shell and hearth-scars. Sites sampled for this dataset include riverine deposits at Barham Forest / Koondrook‑Perricoota (near the Murray River) and lake margins within the Willandra Lakes Region — a wide basin of ephemeral lakes and lunettes in western NSW. Radiocarbon contexts for the two genomic samples span roughly 400 CE to the eve of sustained European colonization in 1788 CE, situating them in the Late Holocene.

Archaeological data indicates persistent hunter‑gatherer lifeways adapted to river and lake ecosystems: curated stone tools, hearth features, and seasonal use of aquatic resources. Oral traditions and ethnographic records point to long continuity of custodial relationships with country; ancient DNA from human remains offers an independent line of evidence that can be compared to these cultural records.

Caveats are essential. Only two genomic samples underpin this cultural identifier, so patterns of population movement, kinship networks or demographic change remain tentative. Limited evidence suggests maternal continuity in this part of NSW through the presence of mtDNA haplogroup S in both individuals, but this must be tested with larger, ethically conducted sampling and strong collaboration with Traditional Owners.

Bulleted lines of ancestry are still being drawn: the material traces speak of deep time across rivers and lakes, while the genetic traces whisper of maternal lineages that endured into the recent past.

The genomic signal available for this cultural label is limited: two individuals, both carrying mitochondrial haplogroup S. Haplogroup S is recognized among Aboriginal Australian maternal lineages and its presence here is consistent with archaeological continuity in New South Wales. Because mtDNA traces only the maternal line, it offers a narrow but valuable window into one strand of ancestry.

No Y‑chromosome haplogroups are reported for these samples, so paternal-line patterns remain unknown. With only two genomes, any population-level inference is preliminary: low sample counts (<10) can misrepresent diversity and obscure micro‑regional structure. Contamination, preservation biases and the uneven survival of DNA in Australian climates further complicate interpretation.

Despite these limits, the genetic data complements archaeology in useful ways. Shared mtDNA types across spatially separated sites may suggest maternal connections or long-standing local continuity; differences could indicate mobility, marriage exchange networks, or changes in demographic structure. Deep time studies of Australian ancient DNA have shown substantial continuity from Pleistocene and Holocene periods into recent centuries, but localized sampling — as in NSW — is essential to understand the finer grain of ancestry.

All genetic interpretations must be framed by ethical collaboration with Indigenous communities, who bring crucial context and consent to the study of ancestral remains.