Rome in Transition

Archaeological contexts and funerary landscapes in Rome between the mid-3rd and early 8th centuries CE record a city negotiating empire, invasion, and reinvention. The 24 sampled individuals come from prominent urban burial complexes — Crypta Balbi, San Ercolano, the churches of Marcellino & Pietro, interments near the Mausoleo di Augusto, and graves on the Celio hill. These sites capture phases from the Crisis of the Third Century (centering on 260–270 CE) through the Lombard migrations and early medieval reorganization around 700 CE.

Material culture — grave goods, burial orientation, and stratigraphic relationships — indicates both continuity with Roman funerary practice and the introduction of new rites over these centuries. Archaeological data indicates episodes of disruption (e.g., cemetery contractions, re-used monuments) but also sustained local occupation. Limited evidence suggests some newcomers integrated into urban neighborhoods rather than forming segregated enclaves.

Genetically, the assemblage should be read as a city snapshot, not a demographic census: the sampled individuals derive from specific burial contexts within Rome and reflect the social and spatial biases of urban cemeteries. While many genetic lineages echo long-standing Mediterranean and European ancestries, the presence of haplogroups with eastern Mediterranean and North African associations hints at Rome’s enduring role as a magnet for mobility. Interpretations must remain cautious: archaeological sampling and preservation bias affect which people are visible to both archaeology and ancient DNA.

The genetic dataset of 24 individuals from Rome (261–700 CE) reveals a mosaic of lineages consistent with a long-standing Mediterranean port that also absorbed mobility from Europe and beyond. On the paternal side, haplogroup J is the most frequent (5/24), followed by I (3), R (3), G (2), and a single E. Haplogroup J, commonly found today across the Near East and parts of the Mediterranean, may reflect historical connectivity to eastern Mediterranean networks — whether through trade, recruitment of soldiers, or movement of families. The presence of haplogroup E, though limited to one individual, can signal occasional links to North Africa; however, single occurrences require caution and cannot alone prove migration patterns.

Maternal lineages show elevated frequencies of mtDNA T (6) and H (5), with K (3), U (2), and J (2) also present. These maternal haplogroups are broadly distributed across Europe and the Mediterranean, indicating substantial maternal continuity as well as diverse ancestries. The combined profile — autosomal affinities (where assessed) alongside uniparental markers — suggests most individuals cluster with Mediterranean and southern European genetic variation, while also including eastern and extra-Mediterranean signals.

Interpretation must emphasize sample scope: 24 individuals are informative for local heterogeneity but limited for citywide demographic reconstruction. Archaeogenetic results align with archaeological evidence of Rome as a cosmopolitan, yet locally rooted, population during Late Antiquity. Further sampling across burial contexts and chronological intervals will refine models of migration, admixture, and social incorporation.