The _Morbus Phoeniceus_ (Phoenician disease) was not, as we have seen, elephantiasis at all, and neither was the _Morbus Campanus_ (Campanian disease) mentagra. But just as elephantiasis might supervene as a consequence of _Morbus Phoeniceus_, so the _foeda cicatrix_ (hideous scar), a mark left behind it by a previous malady, was a consequence of the _Morbus Campanus_. Now what was the nature of this malady that the mark it left behind showed as a _foeda cicatrix_, is precisely what we would wish to determine. The Commentators all take the _cornu exsectum_ (a horn amputated) as giving the explanation, though this is by no means absolutely necessary according to the general drift of the passage as explained; and Sarmentus might perfectly well under these circumstances, arguing from the presence of a scar, assume or at any rate profess to assume as the cause from which this had originated, the previous existence of a horny excrescence, without the latter as an actual matter of fact having ever had any previous existence. To us at any rate the _cornu exsectum_ appears to stand in only a remote connection with the _foeda cicatrix_, which was no doubt later on made the subject of manifold further witticisms; only Horace has given us no more details about the matter, either because they had entirely escaped his memory, or possibly because he had not perfectly grasped the point of these jokes. Certainly the conspicuously placed _at_ (but) seems to point to a distinction of what follows from what precedes—unless indeed it is so placed merely to mark the transition from the _oratio directa_ to the _oratio indirecta_.