As per the New International Version of the Bible…
The point of the story is clear enough but why a calf? I can’t help but think that I’d be skeptical if presented with a baby cow and told it was a divine being but, then, I wasn’t there for it. I’m sure there must be some sort of cultural context which made Aaron opt for “calf” instead of “Sheep” or “Bull” or “Multi-armed humanoid” or “Gila monster”. Especially if you’re trying to impress the rank-and-file with your statue’s divinity.
If the refugees fleeing Egypt, and wandering around for nearly a generation before finding a place of their own to live, were able to take their herds of cattle with them, then the cows (and/or sheep and goats) would have provided a lot for them:
Milk for drinking. Meat for eating. Leather for clothes.
These animals could have been directly seen, daily, as essential gifts from god to support their lives, or something along those lines.
I am curious, though, if these folks truly gave up their (assumedly long held) beliefs overnight, as may be infered in the Bible.
Maybe, for a folks who did not have an idol or symbol of their god, instead chose to finally adopt one, (in the form of a calf) without asking what god thought of that, first.
Several egyptian goddesses were depicted as cows. It was probably in reference to a god that was worshipped in the area of Egypt they came from. (at least according to the story)
Cattle in various stages were used in fertility cults in many Middle Eastern cultures of the period. One of the later laws - “you shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk” - was in reaction to a fertility rite of one of the local religions.
As mentioned, these were wandering animal herders. The safety and increase of their flocks was vitally important - if they wanted a useful god, it would be one that would protect their young animals.
The author(s) of Kings (likely finally edited by the Jeremiah school) is clearly critical of the Jeroboam’s secession, and his setting up Golden Calves as objects of worship.
Some Bible scholars hold that as the Pentateuch was being redacted (also by the Jeremiah school), this story was included and shaped not so much as a critique of Egypt, but as a later critique of the idol worship of Northern Israel.
By the war, the Bible itself rarely refers to the incident recording in Exodus 32 as the “golden calf” but rather “molten calf”. See Ex 32.8, Deut 9:16, Psalms 106.19, Neh. 9.18.
I know that it is referred to Golden calf somewhere in Prophets, but I can’t recall off hand.
Cattle cults were a big deal in the ancient world, especially around the Med, from those already mentioned, and others. Starting from the Lascaux aurochs & the “first city” Çatalhöyük all the way to the Mithraic religion of the Roman empire, with many, many stops in between, like Crete and Europa. While the Biblical story probably directly derives from Apis specifically, with the prevalence and longivety of some form of a cattle cult in the wider area, one could almost say it would be more surprising if it wasn’t a bovine.
Just a note of thanks for the insight. My own experience with the Egyptian pantheon is typical grade school Osiris, Isis & Anubis type stuff. I didn’t know purely animal shaped deities were common.
If you think about it, there are places even today that very literally hold cows sacred. So the cow as an object of worship and veneration shouldn’t be surprising.
astorian might be correct about the “young bull” possibility. However, I had generally heard it explained as rank sarcasm. “These people want to create their strong-as-booll god and all they can come up with is a calf.”
The part I’ve never understood is: since when do slaves wear that much gold jewelry, if any. If gold was such a precious metal, why did the Egyptians allow their slaves to own any? And the same goes for herds of cattle.
In the nomadic Middle East, the most popular form of portable wealth is gold jewelry. If the Hebrews didn’t own real estate in Egypt, all the more reason to keep their savings in the form of jewelry.
After all the plagues were visited upon the Egyptians, they finally decided they’d had enough. “All right! Fine! Go! Quickly! Here, take our stuff! Keep it, just go away!”
There were also, apparently, a good number of Egyptians who went along with them (possibly convinced by the plagues that there was something to this Hebrew god). It may have been these Egyptians who suggested the calf, as well.
I think, also, that a lot of the “cattle” were goats. When Jacob and his sons came to live in Egypt (back in Genesis) they brought their herds of goats with them. According to that passage, goats and goatherders were an “abomination” to Egyptians, and so they were given their own parcel of land away from the Egyptians. The Egyptians, despising goats as they did, were not inclined to go and take them away. What would they do with them? They didn’t even want to touch the beasts.
Also, a WAG: Perhaps the Hebrews weren’t “slaves” in the same sense that we think of today when we hear the word. They may have more of a source of cheap/free labor that simply wasn’t allowed to emigrate. By letting them raise their own food, the Egyptians saved themselves that expense.