I'm not sure if I understand this correctly - let me see.
I agree that this sequence of images is strange, if it was meant to be a zodiac. Your use of words like "disrupted" seem to imply that it was once a zodiac, which has been purposefully reworked, for "pairing" purposes. To me, it seems like a simpler explanation that it was never supposed to be a real zodiac in the first place.
So this pairing. You see a number of month roundels as pairs, and pairs of pairs. But what about the other ones? Does this pattern include all twelve images? How? And if not, why? And why go to the trouble of pairing in the first place? What is the purpose of this? What does it mean, culturally?
About the presence of heraldry, again the same question: why? What does it mean? Why there? What's the purpose of heraldry here, compared to the rest of the manuscript?
I agree that this sequence of images is strange, if it was meant to be a zodiac. Your use of words like "disrupted" seem to imply that it was once a zodiac, which has been purposefully reworked, for "pairing" purposes. To me, it seems like a simpler explanation that it was never supposed to be a real zodiac in the first place.
So this pairing. You see a number of month roundels as pairs, and pairs of pairs. But what about the other ones? Does this pattern include all twelve images? How? And if not, why? And why go to the trouble of pairing in the first place? What is the purpose of this? What does it mean, culturally?
About the presence of heraldry, again the same question: why? What does it mean? Why there? What's the purpose of heraldry here, compared to the rest of the manuscript?