While the Justinianic plague is often referred to as a major pandemic, the current scientific understanding is more nuanced. Modern researchers have raised evidence, including paleomicrobiology studies and historical analyses, that suggest the event may not have been as exceptionally deadly as previously believed.

Studies of ancient DNA from plague victims indicate that the pandemic may have been a resurgence of a strain of Yersinia pestis that had been circulating before, causing outbreaks referred to as the 'Plague of Athens'. This suggests the 'Plague of Justinian' may have extended rather than started a broader period of plague activity in Eurasia, rather than being the first widespread emergence of the disease.

Historical records also suggest a variation in intensity and duration across regions, with varying impact on different areas and populations. Some communities may have experienced severe mortality rates, while others faced lesser impacts.

The term 'landmark' implies a distinct historical event with exceptional features or consequences. Researchers argue that the overall demographic and societal changes attributed to the Justinianic plague may have been gradual, cumulative effects of multiple disease waves and other factors, including climatic changes, warfare, and migrations over several decades.

Therefore, while the Justinianic plague undoubtedly caused significant disruption and mortality during its time, the prevailing scientific consensus is that it was a prominent pandemic within a broader pattern of plague outbreaks rather than a singularly extraordinary event.