The point is that this supposed "batch trimming" took place before the quire marks were placed. The quire marks being from XV century, the trimming must have been done not much later than the VMS creation, maybe several decades at most.
I'm not sure if parchment edges would have been much worn in a few decades, would they?
About height irregularity: if so, then the trimming did not reach its goal. See f24, its height is notably less than other folios in the quire - except for the folio 17, with which it comprises a single bifolio. This means that the trimming was made prior to the stitching (even the initial stitching), because otherwise all bifolios of the quire would have been roughly of the same height - unless, of course, this bifolio was erroneously mixed in the wrong quire and there's a better match for it elsewhere in terms of height.
Furthermore, folio 17 and folio 24 are trimmed more or less in the same fashion. Although not exactly symmetrically, but they are trimmed to the greater extent in the middle of the bifolio, and to the lesser extent to the left and right ot the bifolio. This means that this trimming was done when the bifolio was already folded.
So the tentative order of operations is as follows:
1) bifolios are filled with drawings and text
2) bifolios are folded
... <bifolios probably exist unstitched for an indefinite period of time, up to several decades>
3) bifolios are trimmed
4) bifolios are grouped, stitched and quire marks are put down
@Wladimir
That's interesting! Looking forward to read your findings.
I'm not sure if parchment edges would have been much worn in a few decades, would they?
About height irregularity: if so, then the trimming did not reach its goal. See f24, its height is notably less than other folios in the quire - except for the folio 17, with which it comprises a single bifolio. This means that the trimming was made prior to the stitching (even the initial stitching), because otherwise all bifolios of the quire would have been roughly of the same height - unless, of course, this bifolio was erroneously mixed in the wrong quire and there's a better match for it elsewhere in terms of height.
Furthermore, folio 17 and folio 24 are trimmed more or less in the same fashion. Although not exactly symmetrically, but they are trimmed to the greater extent in the middle of the bifolio, and to the lesser extent to the left and right ot the bifolio. This means that this trimming was done when the bifolio was already folded.
So the tentative order of operations is as follows:
1) bifolios are filled with drawings and text
2) bifolios are folded
... <bifolios probably exist unstitched for an indefinite period of time, up to several decades>
3) bifolios are trimmed
4) bifolios are grouped, stitched and quire marks are put down
@Wladimir
That's interesting! Looking forward to read your findings.