Hi Marco,
I was mainly referring to this thread: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
What I meant is that it's not a horoscope. The imagery doesn't correspond with any medieval system I have know of that was ever used to actively predict the future. Some people used to call the zodiac the "horoscope" and that annoyed me back then. A correct knowledge of terminology and methodology is necessary before delving into the murky, mysterious and mystical world of astrology.
I would divide the medieval (and by extension, the modern!) concept of the influence of the zodiac into two states, active and passive. Passive would be the attributes you were imbued with according to your sign, and as discussed in your examples - ie, you're a Taurus so you are humble and hardworking.
Lazrado (lazrar) is defined by the RAE as "to have and suffer work and misery", by the way. Certainly an unpleasant word! Anybody know of an English equivalent?
Active is trying to cast a fortune based upon your zodiac, and that's when you get astrological charts and all the rest of the mumbo-jumbo.
It's the second case I think we can disregard. Indeed, some medieval commentators made the same distinction and would believe in the first but discard the second.
Certainly the zodiac section could contain passive elements, and as I have argued elsewhere, probably does. The technical term for this is a myrogenesis, or degrees of the zodiac. But as you say, the text will tell all!
I hope I've cleared up my reasoning for you.