La Quemada and Malpaso settlement networks - History, Government, Language, and Sources

Download PDF creates a visual, rasterized copy. Use Print for selectable text and better assistive-technology support.

Western and Northern Mexican Worlds: Communities, Landscapes, and Connections
Western and northern Mexican contexts (orientation only) · Source-reviewed profile

La Quemada and Malpaso settlement networks

Reviewed community and place names are preserved where supported; no otherwise unknown ancient self-designation is invented.

INAH discusses built connections among settlements and resource-work areas. This atlas does not turn them into navigable routes or territorial boundaries. INAH distinguishes later identifications with Chicomóztoc from archaeological chronological work; the traditions are not neutral occupation records.

Regional settlement and political-scale context Approximately fourth–twelfth centuries CE; principal activity approximately 600–850 CE in INAH's interpretation Architecture, built connections, settlement survey and later historical interpretations Zacatecas, Zacatecas (orientation only): approximate public-town or distant institutional orientation, not an excavation, burial, sacred-site, cave-entrance, private compound or vulnerable-deposit location; never a territorial, ethnic, linguistic, cultural, political, religious, sovereignty, farming, water-rights or route boundary. The orientation may be far from the archaeological context. No access, collecting or travel permission is implied.
Overview

Tools, water, households, and regional worlds

Desert, peninsular, Pacific, highland, and Bajío connections

Zacatecas, Zacatecas is modern orientation, not an ancient capital or boundary. Differentiated spaces support hierarchical models; modeled regional control is not a neutral census or fixed state border.

Political organization and community scale

Differentiated spaces support hierarchical models; modeled regional control is not a neutral census or fixed state border. La Quemada is not demonstrated to be Chicomóztoc; later origin traditions and modern settlement-control estimates require attribution.

Colonial transformation, living heritage, and modern reception

Living communities and heritage institutions retain their own authority; this atlas cannot establish identity, ancestry, descent, recognition or membership. Archaeological materials do not identify every ancient speaker. Living language communities, self-designations and membership authority remain distinct. Events after 1600 CE and modern research, conservation and stewardship are dated separately from the main historical context.

Connected activities INAH discusses built connections among settlements and resource-work areas. This atlas does not turn them into navigable routes or territorial boundaries.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered evidence, not author or community endorsement. Retain chronological, sampling and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S1]
Later origin traditions INAH distinguishes later identifications with Chicomóztoc from archaeological chronological work; the traditions are not neutral occupation records.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered evidence, not author or community endorsement. Retain chronological, sampling and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S2]
Recorded heritage The catalog documents a present-day archaeological context, not recognition of a modern claimant or proof of inherited jurisdiction.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered evidence, not author or community endorsement. Retain chronological, sampling and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S3]
Historical sequence

A concise, sourced timeline

These milestones are orientation points, not a complete history.

  1. Long sequence

    The interpreted occupation extends beyond its principal monumental interval.

    [S2]

  2. Principal investment

    INAH assigns prominent regional building activity to this interval.

    [S2]

  3. Retrospective identification

    INAH attributes an origin-related identification to Torquemada, long after the main occupation.

    [S2]

  4. Chronological reassessment

    Excavation helped distinguish dated occupation from later migration traditions.

    [S2]
Culture and language

Foodways, craft, household labor, water, and power

Languages named in this profile

  • Archaeological materials do not identify every ancient speaker. Living language communities, self-designations and membership authority remain distinct.

Language family: Language, material classification, political allegiance, residence and living identity are distinct; this record does not classify every ancient speaker.

Research focus: Architecture, built connections, settlement survey and later historical interpretations.

Differentiated spaces support hierarchical models; modeled regional control is not a neutral census or fixed state border.

La Quemada is not demonstrated to be Chicomóztoc; later origin traditions and modern settlement-control estimates require attribution.

No artifact, rock-art, sacred-site, burial or human-remains imagery or restricted knowledge is reproduced.

DNAGENICS provides AI-assisted, source-checked educational paraphrases. Cited authors, institutions and communities did not author or endorse this atlas. Public availability does not establish cultural consent or permission to reproduce objects, sacred knowledge or human remains. No imagery is reproduced. Specialist and community review is recommended; use the website contact channel for corrections, rights concerns or removal requests.

AI research guide

Ask about this reviewed profile

The guide can explain and connect facts already present on this page. It cannot search the open web, establish identity or citizenship, or evaluate ancestry and genetic information.

Grounded in approved profile content Citations use the source IDs below No account or DNA context

AI-generated interpretation of genetic similarity, not proof of ancestry. Informational only, not professional advice.

Read full notice

Before you continue: the analysis you are about to generate is produced by an AI model. AI output can be incomplete, inaccurate, or simply wrong. It describes statistical genetic similarity to reference populations and is not proof of ancestry, ethnicity, identity, or descent. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only, and is not medical, diagnostic, genealogical, legal, or other professional advice. Do not rely on it to make health, financial, legal, or family decisions. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, DNA Genics, S.L. accepts no liability for any loss or decision arising from your use of this AI output.

Do not enter names, contact details, family-tree information, account or kit identifiers, or genetic data.

Evidence register

Sources used for this page

Prefer Indigenous governments, museums, heritage organizations, accountable field projects and public heritage institutions. Give source title, author or organization, date and stable link. Brief summaries are DNAGENICS AI-assisted interpretations, not author or community endorsement, reproduction permission or community review.

  1. C1

    Atlas de los Pueblos Indígenas de México

    Instituto Nacional de los Pueblos Indígenas and Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Indígenas · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

  2. C2

    Catálogo Nacional de Pueblos y Comunidades Indígenas y Afromexicanas

    Instituto Nacional de los Pueblos Indígenas · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

  3. C3

    Multitechnique dating of earthen irrigation canals at the La Playa site, Sonora, Mexico

    Rachel Cajigas, Jay Quade and Tammy Rittenour; Geoarchaeology, University of Arizona research record · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2020

  4. C4

    El pasado del pasado. Artefacto prehistórico en una tumba de El Opeño, Michoacán

    Arturo Oliveros and Gianfranco Cassiano; Arqueología 29, INAH · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2003

  5. C5

    El impacto del bienestar social en la conservación de los bienes de interés cultural. Sitio arqueológico de Las Labradas y la comunidad de la Chicayota

    Sarahí Tirado Osuna; CR. Conservación y Restauración 10, INAH · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2018

  6. C6

    Nadie cuida lo que no conoce: acciones de conservación para revertir el impacto antrópico en sitios rupestres en Nuevo León

    Sandra Cruz Flores, Adriana Castillo Bejero and Anacaren Morales Ortiz; CR. Conservación y Restauración, INAH · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2018

  7. C7

    La Quemada

    Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

  8. C8

    Rock Paintings of the Sierra de San Francisco

    UNESCO World Heritage Centre · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · 1993 inscription; institutional record consulted 2026-10-20

  9. S1

    Zona Arqueológica La Quemada

    Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

  10. S2

    La Quemada

    Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

  11. S3

    La Quemada: institutional catalog record

    Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) · Institutional research, heritage interpretation or community account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated institutional record; consulted 2026-10-20

Sources and names remain the property of their respective publishers and communities. Their inclusion is for citation and education; it does not imply endorsement of DNAGENICS. Summaries are original editorial paraphrases and should be checked against the linked source for important use.

Editorial review: October 20, 2026

Continue exploring
Western and northern Mexican contexts (orientation only) Alta Vista and Chalchihuites built networks Reviewed community and place names are preserved where supported; no otherwise unknown ancient self-designation is invented. Read profile Western and northern Mexican contexts (orientation only) Boca de Potrerillos: rock art, evidence, and care Reviewed community and place names are preserved where supported; no otherwise unknown ancient self-designation is invented. Read profile Western and northern Mexican contexts (orientation only) Cañada de la Virgen: Laja architecture and interpretation Reviewed community and place names are preserved where supported; no otherwise unknown ancient self-designation is invented. Read profile
Use code for 35% off • Expires Nov 01