A complicating factor here is the issue of sources. For those that accept the documentary hypothesis, the "P" source is weighted toward Aaron while the "J" source is more pro-Moses. Regarding @Dottard's answer, Ex. 4 is thought to be from the J source while the relevant parts of Ex. 7 are from P. (This link is useful for discerning which verses belong to the various sources.) The hypothetical fact of two different sources also accounts for Ex. 4 calling the snake "nachash" and Ex. 7 calling it "tannin."

The P source is also the hypothetical source of Numbers 7, which gives special prominence not only to Aaron's rod but also to his authority of high priest. The "E" source, meanwhile, is openly critical of Aaron, making him the villain in the story of the Golden Calf. The "P" source's viewpoint ultimately carried the day, as Moses' descendants amounted to little, while Aaron's acted as priests and high priests throughout history.

Conclusion. As the OP shows, my language was not definite regarding the "two staffs" really being one. In fact, I think it may be impossible to reach a definite conclusion on this matter.

A complicating factor here is the issue of sources. For those that accept the documentary hypothesis, the "P" source is weighted toward Aaron while the "J" source is more pro-Moses. Regarding @Dottard's answer, Ex. 4 is thought to be from the J source while the relevant parts of Ex. 7 are from P. (This link is useful for discerning which verses belong to the various sources.) The hypothetical fact of two different sources also accounts for Ex. 4 calling the snake "nachash" and Ex. 7 calling it "tannin."

The P source is also the hypothetical source of Numbers 7, which gives special prominence not only to Aaron's rod but also to his authority as high priest. The "E" source, meanwhile, is openly critical of Aaron, making him the villain in the story of the Golden Calf. The "P" source's viewpoint ultimately carried the day, as Moses' descendants amounted to little, while Aaron's acted as priests and high priests throughout history.

Conclusion. As the OP shows, my language was not definite regarding the "two staffs" really being one. In fact, I think it may be impossible to reach a definite conclusion on this matter.

A complicating factor here is the issue of sources. For those that accept the documentary hypothesis, the "P" source is weighted toward Aaron while the "J" source is less so. Regarding @Dottard's answer, Ex. 4 is thought to be from the J source while the relevant parts of Ex. 7 are from P. (This link is useful for discerning which verses belong to the various sources.) The hypothetical fact of two different sources also accounts for Ex. 4 calling the snake "nachash" and Ex. 7 calling it "tannin."

The P source is also the hypothetical source of Numbers 7, which gives special prominence not only to Aaron's rod but also to his authority of high priest. The "E" source, meanwhile, is openly critical of Aaron, making him the villain in the story of the Golden Calf. The "P" source's viewpoint ultimately carried the day, as Moses' descendants amounted to little, while Aaron's acted as priests and high priests throughout history.

Conclusion. As the OP indicated, my language was not definite regarding the "two staffs" really being one. In fact, I think it may be impossible to reach a definite conclusion on this matter, especially given the fact of differing opinions regarding the legitimacy of the documentary hypothesis.

A complicating factor here is the issue of sources. For those that accept the documentary hypothesis, the "P" source is weighted toward Aaron while the "J" source is more pro-Moses. Regarding @Dottard's answer, Ex. 4 is thought to be from the J source while the relevant parts of Ex. 7 are from P. (This link is useful for discerning which verses belong to the various sources.) The hypothetical fact of two different sources also accounts for Ex. 4 calling the snake "nachash" and Ex. 7 calling it "tannin."

The P source is also the hypothetical source of Numbers 7, which gives special prominence not only to Aaron's rod but also to his authority of high priest. The "E" source, meanwhile, is openly critical of Aaron, making him the villain in the story of the Golden Calf. The "P" source's viewpoint ultimately carried the day, as Moses' descendants amounted to little, while Aaron's acted as priests and high priests throughout history.

Conclusion. As the OP shows, my language was not definite regarding the "two staffs" really being one. In fact, I think it may be impossible to reach a definite conclusion on this matter.