DNA - Moses and Aharon - the first High Priest?

Yes, the data isn't fine enough to point directly to a single specific named person, just that there was a single common ancestor in the right time period. I doubt it could ever be specific enough to rule out a man's brother.

But it does confirm that the Cohanim have succeeded in maintaining their line for over 3000 years, apparently with little infidelity amongst their wives.

Look at how carefully the article words its references to Aaron as the ancestor. Science says that there was a common ancestor for the line. Jewish tradition says that it was Aaron. There's no way to prove that tradition specifically. But the genetic research is confirming as much of it as it can at this time, without any contradiction of it.

In terms of the archaeology of the ancient Israelites, what really matters is the date. If we can get the range of error on that narrowed down, it could help us interpret a lot of findings more clearly.

What is your source for this supposed study giving a genetic link between a modern family name and a couple of characters from Hebrew myth that likely have no basis in historical fact?

Addendum: Firstly apologies if my response came across as overly aggressive. It is all to common on Y!A for people claim a study says something without providing a source and it can be very frustrating - especially if it is controversial.

Having read your link, and the abstract of the one provided by ⌡Machine Head⌠it is indeed a very interesting and valid study (more than one actually). It is very unusual for Y-chromosome data to show this much consistency along the male line of any family name.

I didn't necessarily infer that you are "a religious person that believes in the divine", however you did strongly imply that you consider Moses and Aharon to be historical figures - this is a far from uncontroversial position. For instance Israel Finkelstein, Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University strongly contends that the city of Jericho would have been abandoned for at least a century by the time Joshua would have found it. This in itself must cast doubt on the historical accuracy of the rest of Exodus if one is to agree with Finkelstein's methodology and conclusions. There have been other scholars that have contented nothing in the Bible should be taken as historical before the time of Saul, David and Solomon and others that contend that even that is too early. The historicity of the Bible is, and is likely to remain, the subject of much academic debate and controversy. We can but hope that new archaeological discoveries will steadily settle this over time, but it seems unlikely there will ever be a definitive answer.

[Sorry, I am falling into my own trap of not providing sources here but Biblical Historicity is such a big and controversial subject that beyond citing Dr. Finklestein, the best I can do is offer the Wiki page on the subject as a starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bi... ]

My point is all of this is that Moses and Aharon remain characters from mythology who may or may not have a basis in fact. One cannot infer from the amazing genetic similarity of the Cohen male genetic line that this family is descended from Aharon, or even that the existence of a historical Aharon.

Your contention that the Cohen line could also contain descendants of Moses is of course valid if one does consider these to be historical figures. It is also possible that the common ancestor is further back along the line and many possessing this particular haplotype would have been distant cousins by the time of that generation.

Once again, apologies if my initial response seemed curt, but without having reference to the study one is citing it is almost impossible to give a considered response. An interesting study indeed but not one too much should be inferred from, despite the last couple of paragraphs of your link, is now my opinion. It is indeed valid research that link the vast majority of Cohanim to the same lineage going back thousands of years.

Since they have no tissue from Aaron they cannot say definitively,

but what is interesting is that all Kohanan lines that are not obviously compromised show evidence of radiating from a single male from a time consistent with the Biblical account.

Moses wasn't a priest, only Aharon and his sons the Levitt's were of the priestly line.