Indigenous Lore
Lore of the Land in Victorian Indigenous Communities: Law, Country, and Kinship
For tens of thousands of years, Indigenous communities across Victoria lived according to Lore—the spiritual and cultural law of Country. Unlike European legal systems imposed after colonisation, Lore is maintained through oral traditions, ceremony, and songlines; it governs kinship, marriage, ecological care, and obligations to ancestors and totems (Barwick, 1998; Broome, 2005). Lore is not merely a code of rules but a holistic system binding people, land, waters, and sky into one order of belonging (Howitt, 1904; Clark, 1990).
What is Lore?
Lore refers to ancestral teachings from the Dreaming and their ongoing enactment.
Spiritual: Rooted in Creation Beings and obligations to Ancestral Spirits (Howitt, 1904; Strehlow, 1971).
Ecological: Directs sustainable care for Country—fire, water, species stewardship, seasons (Clark, 1990; Clarke, 2009).
Kinship-based: Structures identity, conduct, and marriage rules (Barwick, 1998; Keen, 2004).
Ceremonial: Renewed through ritual, dance, song, and initiation (Strehlow, 1971; Broome, 2005).
Lore in the Kulin Nations
Across the Kulin Nations (Woiwurrung/Wurundjeri, Boon Wurrung, Taungurung, Wadawurrung, Dja Dja Wurrung), Lore was anchored in the Bunjil (Eaglehawk) and Waa (Crow) moieties. Everyone belonged to one of these halves; marriage was across moieties to maintain balance and reciprocity (Barwick, 1998; Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung CHAC, 2021).
Ceremonies such as Tanderrum formalised safe passage and access to resources, while gatherings at quarries like Mount William observed strict exchange protocols under Lore (McBryde, 1984; Broome, 2005). Moiety responsibilities extended to species and places, embedding ecological law in everyday life (Clarke, 2009).
Wadawurrung Lore
On Wadawurrung Country—Geelong, Ballarat, the Bellarine, and the western volcanic plains—Lore is entwined with rivers, coasts, stone and lava flows. The Wurdi Youang stone arrangement, aligned to solstices, shows how astronomy, ceremony, and ecological obligation intersect in Lore (Clark, 1990; Hamacher, 2012; Norris & Hamacher, 2014).
Obligations included care for murnong (yam daisy), kangaroos, and waterbirds, and the regulation of harvesting through seasonality and ceremony. Bunjil/Waa moiety law governed marriage and initiation; violations—such as neglecting staple foods or damaging sacred places—were both social and spiritual offences (Barwick, 1998; Broome, 2005; Wadawurrung TOAC, 2021).
Gunditjmara Lore
For the Gunditjmara, Lore is bound to Budj Bim and kooyang (eel). Clans maintained an engineered landscape of stone channels and ponds for millennia; Lore required upkeep of weirs, regulated harvests, and respect for waterways (Clark, 1990; McNiven & Bell, 2010). The UNESCO listing of the Budj Bim Cultural Landscape affirms the authority and continuity of this law (UNESCO, 2019).
Yorta Yorta Lore
The Yorta Yorta locate Lore in Dhungala (Murray River), regarded as ancestor and lawgiver. Responsibilities include river protection, observing breeding seasons, and sharing fish and water resources; ceremonies reaffirmed these duties across kin networks (Atkinson, 2002; Broome, 2005).
Enforcing Lore
Lore is upheld by Elders and community consensus. Sanctions focus on restoring balance rather than retribution and may include ritual punishment, public censure, reparations, or exclusion from ceremony (Howitt, 1904; Reynolds, 1987). Breaches include:
Marrying within the same moiety (forbidden) (Barwick, 1998).
Disrespecting totem species or sacred places, endangering kinship and spiritual equilibrium (Clarke, 2009; Keen, 2004).
Impacts of Colonisation
Colonisation disrupted Lore through terra nullius, missions, removals, and legal regimes that ignored Indigenous sovereignty (Reynolds, 1987; Broome, 2005). Ceremonies were curtailed; languages carrying law were suppressed (Blake, 1991). Despite this, Elders sustained teachings within families and Country, enabling contemporary revival and legal/policy recognition efforts (Barwick, 1998; Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung CHAC, 2021; Wadawurrung TOAC, 2021).
Lore Beyond Victoria
Comparable systems appear across Australia:
Yolŋu (NT): Dhuwa/Yirritja moieties govern marriage, ceremony, and song (Morphy, 1991).
Arrernte (Central Desert): Duties tied to Altyerrenge (Dreaming tracks) and sites (Strehlow, 1971).
Noongar (WA): Kobong (totems) encode ecological obligations (Moore, 1842/1978).
Global analogues include tapu in Polynesia and clan totem systems in Africa and North America (Keen, 2004).
Contemporary Revitalisation
Education & Culture: Schools and cultural programs teach moieties, totems, and ecological law (Broome, 2005; Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung CHAC, 2021).
Traditional Owner Governance: Organisations such as Wadawurrung TOAC and Gunditj Mirring embed Lore in land and water management (Wadawurrung TOAC, 2021; McNiven & Bell, 2010).
Justice & Treaty: Truth-telling and treaty processes in Victoria recognise the displacement of Lore and support self-determination frameworks (Broome, 2005).
Lore remains a living foundation for governance, care for Country, and identity.
Conclusion
Lore is the bedrock of Victorian Indigenous life. Among Kulin, Gunditjmara, Yorta Yorta, Wadawurrung, and others, it has structured kinship, ceremony, and ecology for millennia. Though colonisation undermined these systems, Lore endures through Elders, Country, and revitalisation—reminding us that just societies rest on reciprocity, responsibility, and respect for land and kin.
References
Atkinson, W. (2002). Not One Iota: The Yorta Yorta Struggle for Land Justice. Melbourne: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Barwick, D. (1998). Rebellion at Coranderrk. Canberra: Aboriginal History Monograph.
Blake, B. (1991). Wathawurrung and the Colac Language of Southern Victoria. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Broome, R. (2005). Aboriginal Victorians: A History Since 1800. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Clark, I. (1990). Aboriginal Languages and Clans: An Historical Atlas of Western and Central Victoria, 1800–1900. Melbourne: Monash Publications in Geography.
Clarke, P.A. (2009). Australian Aboriginal Ethnobotany: An Overview. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.
Hamacher, D.W. (2012). On Aboriginal Astronomy in Victoria. Journal of Astronomical History & Heritage, 15, 121–134.
Keen, I. (2004). Aboriginal Economy and Society: Australia at the Threshold of Colonisation. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
McBryde, I. (1984). Kulin Greenstone Quarries: The Social Context of Production and Distribution for the Mt William Site. Canberra: ANU Press.
McNiven, I., & Bell, D. (2010). Fish Traps and Cultural Engineering at Budj Bim. World Archaeology, 42(2), 185–197.
Moore, G.F. (1842/1978). A Descriptive Vocabulary of the Language in Common Use Amongst the Aborigines of Western Australia. Nedlands: University of Western Australia Press.
Morphy, H. (1991). Ancestral Connections: Art and an Aboriginal System of Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Norris, R.P., & Hamacher, D.W. (2014). Australian Aboriginal Astronomy: Overview and New Data. New York: Springer.
Reynolds, H. (1987). The Law of the Land. Ringwood: Penguin.
Strehlow, T. (1971). Songs of Central Australia. Sydney: Angus & Robertson.
UNESCO. (2019). Budj Bim Cultural Landscape World Heritage Listing. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation. (2021). Bunjil and Waa in Wadawurrung Culture. Geelong.
Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation. (2021). Moieties of the Kulin Nations. Melbourne.
Written, Researched and Directed by James Vegter 16/09/2025
MLA
Sharing the truth of Indigenous and colonial history through film, education, land and community.
Copyright of MLA – 2025
Magic Lands Alliance acknowledge the Traditional Owners, Custodians, and First Nations communities across Australia and internationally. We honour their enduring connection to the sky, land, waters, language, and culture. We pay our respects to Elders past, present, and emerging, and to all First Peoples communities and language groups. This article draws only on publicly available information; many cultural practices remain the intellectual property of communities.