Is there a way to link Berge's theorem of maximum to Envelope theorem? Berge's theorem states


  Let $X \in \mathbb R^m, \Theta \in \mathbb R^n $, $f : X \times \Theta \to \mathbb R$ be a jointly continuous function, $C : \Theta  \rightrightarrows X$ be a continuous(both upper and lower hemicontinuous) compact-valued correspondence.The maximized value function and maximizer are
  $$V(\theta) := \max_{x \in X}f(x, \theta)$$
  $$C^\ast(\theta):=\{x \in C(\theta) \mid f(x, \theta )=V(\theta)\}$$
  Then $V : \Theta \to \mathbb R$ is continuous and $C^\ast :\Theta \rightrightarrows  X$ is upper hemicontinuous.


According to Varian's Microeconomic Analysis(1992), page 490, Envelope theorem is simply:


  $$\frac{dM(a)}{da}=\frac{\partial f(x,a)}{\partial a}\mid_{x=x(a)}$$


$x(a)$ is the maximizer of $f(\cdot, a)$.

It seems to me Envelope theorem entails Berge's theorem, but the derivation looks way simpler. Is there a relationship between the two?
They are related and usually fall into the same discussion, but as @Alecos mentions in the comments, the two theorems show different things.

I suppose the connection that you're after is the fact that if
the derivative
$$
\left .\frac{\partial f(x, a)}{\partial a} \right |_{x=x(a)} 
$$
exists, then because differentiability implies continuity, you might be able
to get part of theorem of the maximum out of it. However, to compare and contrast two theorems you mustn't just look at the results. You need to look at the assumptions as well. For example, the theorem of the maximum doesn't assume any sort of differentiability. The envelope theorem does (at least some forms of it). In any case, the assumptions that go into each are different (some stronger, some weaker).

Also, there is this. The envelope theorem
doesn't tell you that anything about the control function. Therefore, you definitely wont be able to get the result that $C^*$ is upper hemicontinuous.