14-02-2018, 10:09 PM
Not that I intended to blow the discussion up with novelty, just expressed my simple view on that. In fact, I was being busily discussing a paypal refund in the parallel browser window, so my apologies if my comment lacked in depth. 
But nonetheless it's the most straightforward explanation. You have a comparatively large (say, six times the square of a Voynich folio) foldout, with many objects in there to label. That's a tedious and cumbersome task. So what systematic way do you undertake for inserting all those labels? You select some object as a starting point (after all, you need to start with some) and orientate the foldout in such a way so as to have the object "properly orientated". E.g. if you have a figure of a cat and you are about to label the various parts of it, it's ever better to have the cat depicted with its head up and legs down than otherwise, i.e. upside down or rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise. Having inserted labels for the first object, you move to the next object. The peripheral sections of the "map" are visually looking as some "path" (from one circle to another) along which the observer can (visually) "travel". So for the creator it's just natural to follow that path when labeling the objects. E.g. when he comes to the circle which Wastl & Feger consider Africa, he just rotates the sheet so as to have the "top" of the "Africa" looking upwards, and continues to label. And so forth.
As I said, such might have been the way of depicting those intermediary "paths" as well. Note that the "lighthouse" and the "three towers" are both orientated clockwise (the mansion opposite to the "lighthouse" is, however, orientated in an opposite direction).
That view is actually invariant to what's the object in the centre. I used the point from Wastl & Feger about the heavenly Jerusalem, but it could be anything. As long as its domes are facing upwards, I believe one has the proper orientation of the foldout - if it has "proper" orientation at all, - but at least the orientation which was initially taken by the map-creator, since I have no doubt that "Jerusalem" was the first thing elaborated in the folio after the geometric schema was laid down.
Bottomline: I believe the "dynamic orientation" is inherent not to the way the map is supposed to be held, but to the way it was drawn. Hence, orientating the labels in the way of conveniently reading them would orientate the respective object "properly".
But nonetheless it's the most straightforward explanation. You have a comparatively large (say, six times the square of a Voynich folio) foldout, with many objects in there to label. That's a tedious and cumbersome task. So what systematic way do you undertake for inserting all those labels? You select some object as a starting point (after all, you need to start with some) and orientate the foldout in such a way so as to have the object "properly orientated". E.g. if you have a figure of a cat and you are about to label the various parts of it, it's ever better to have the cat depicted with its head up and legs down than otherwise, i.e. upside down or rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise. Having inserted labels for the first object, you move to the next object. The peripheral sections of the "map" are visually looking as some "path" (from one circle to another) along which the observer can (visually) "travel". So for the creator it's just natural to follow that path when labeling the objects. E.g. when he comes to the circle which Wastl & Feger consider Africa, he just rotates the sheet so as to have the "top" of the "Africa" looking upwards, and continues to label. And so forth.
As I said, such might have been the way of depicting those intermediary "paths" as well. Note that the "lighthouse" and the "three towers" are both orientated clockwise (the mansion opposite to the "lighthouse" is, however, orientated in an opposite direction).
That view is actually invariant to what's the object in the centre. I used the point from Wastl & Feger about the heavenly Jerusalem, but it could be anything. As long as its domes are facing upwards, I believe one has the proper orientation of the foldout - if it has "proper" orientation at all, - but at least the orientation which was initially taken by the map-creator, since I have no doubt that "Jerusalem" was the first thing elaborated in the folio after the geometric schema was laid down.
Bottomline: I believe the "dynamic orientation" is inherent not to the way the map is supposed to be held, but to the way it was drawn. Hence, orientating the labels in the way of conveniently reading them would orientate the respective object "properly".