A full explanation of the paradoxes of the Red Cow has been offered by Jacob Milgrom (1990, pp. 438–44; 1991, pp. 270–78). This theory does not ignore relevant biblical textual evidence, as does Neusner's theory. Milgrom assembles all the data in his usual admirable way; but the resultant theory is not fully satisfactory, for it does seem that the uniqueness of the Red Cow disappears under his treatment.

To give a preliminary example: Milgrom considers the vital question why the Red Cow is a cow. In all other sacrifices featuring the larger animals, the sacrifice is a bull. Only when the sacrifice is from the sheep or the goats can the animal be a female. Milgrom's answer to this question is that in this case alone we are looking for a supply of ashes to be mixed with water to function as a purification for corpse-impurity. A large animal is more suitable to provide a viable supply; on the other hand, the Red Cow is a sin-offering (or in Milgrom's terminology a ‘purification offering’) and these are always females. So for once the female purification offering is taken from the herd instead of from the flock.

I suggest, however, that we should be looking for a solution with wider explanatory force than this. Both the redness and the cowness of the Red Cow are striking features that should turn our minds in the direction of comparative religion, rather than Israelite priestly technicalities. The cow goddess in Egypt and India, and her precursor in prehistoric times, are relevant to the discussion of an area where, as Milgrom admits, Israelite religion shows continuity with far older cults.