The sequence of images

[Linda]

The question is whether 79v, 80v, 81v, and 82v create a sequence of images that has this sort of subtle 'agenda', to create / reveal this progressive focus on a particular historical time and place. Does the sequence exist?

I would say no. 

1. You are talking about a sequence that only shows up every second page, starting near the middle of the quire. This seems strange way to create a sequence.

2. I don't even think the current page order is correct. Instead of 75 thru 84 i think it is 76, 80, 84, 77, 78, 81, 82, 75, 79, 83.
This makes your pages 10 12 14 and 16 out of 20 become something like pages 3, 18, 12, and 14, no longer much of a sequence at all. 

3. Can the comparison be accepted? It can be accepted as a suggested comparison, but if you are asking if it can be accepted as the answer i would say not at this time, at least.

4. Can a strong comparison be accepted if it lacks provenance? Answer: Depends on what the comparison is. Provenance, strong or not, in no way gives a visual comparison strength, although it might add strength to the narrative.  Currently the provenance appears to be the only narrative, there is nothing about why these images should be important enough to be copied, what we are to gain from them, or how they fit in with the rest of the images. 

5. When a comparison is poor, why is that? Answer: Because it does not match visually.
I was just looking at different versions of la sfera, and i do note that there can be major differences in how images denoting the same items compare, and sometimes you need to compare them to understand what the least clear version represents, but if you are making the point that certain pictures from books in someone's library are referenced, i dont see how you can allow for differences since you are saying they are specific versions and not the concepts. Or are you saying that other styles of the drawings are also allowed? Seems a poor point to make to use another style of the drawing to denote a specific one it doesn't resemble.

6. Similarly, unrecognized comparison also means they don't look the same, no matter what forgotten traditions might have been involved.

7. The VMs author needed to use tradition and history in order to make a comparison that is grounded in the real world, but chose to disguise them. < So you are saying they don't look the same because the answer would be too clear to the contemporary reader? Although i agree that some obfuscation has been purposeful, i don't know about applying that to copies of pictures. There should be some elements that would leave those who recognize them without doubt. I think the Oresme example with the 43 undulations is pretty convincing, despite other differences, but the others in quire 13, i have major doubts about. 

8. The more obvious examples then require a greater effort at disguise, making those examples even more difficult to recover. A variety tricks have been employed. < Again i agree but not in context of these copies of drawings. Can you explain exactly what you mean in terms of the tricks employed. I fear it is easy to use this idea as an explanation of why things dont look more the same, when the real reason is that they simply aren't the same. When i say things are obfuscated, i mean the nymph size vs the pool size is not to scale, not that things haven't been drawn to look like what they are meant to be, although from a quick glance things could be thought to be as they are not drawn, like the mermaid, there is no mermaid. I do not think there is Melusine either, the de Berry version has tail of a lizard and wings, and wears a hat. If anything she has more in common with the vms dragon. Even the fishier versions found elsewhere do not resemble the vms fish.

9. The flimsy connection is an opportunity for voluntary self-disqualification. < I do not know what this means. If the connection is flimsy, disqualify yourself for seeing it?