# Talk:Gaius Antonius Hybrida

I notice that the encyclopedia in English gave the same name which could be for 2 men : Caius Antonius Nepos and Antonius Hybrida. In other languages, the consul in 63 BC is just Caius Antonius. 
Pliny supposes that Antonius Hybrida was the consul. He could be wrong. 
He could have confused the two men. One is really the son of Orator (Caius Antonius), the other not. One was praetor in 67 BC(Caius Antonius), so inside the Senate for more than 3 years, the other (Antonius Hybrida) was excluded from the Senate in 70 BC.
Some authors think that Caius Antonius was Nepos, this other, Hybrida, the ex senator expelled from the Senate in exile in Spain. 
réf : http://oll.libertyfund.org/Texts/Cicero0070/PoliticalWorks/0044-01_Bk.html

There's no need for every single date in this article to have "BC" tacked on to it. I may have missed a few but ... gees. No professional publication would allow such a constant overuse of the BC (or BCE) tag on dates. It just looks silly. "In 87 BC, Hybrida accompanied Lucius Cornelius Sulla into Greece either as a military tribune or as a legatus. Two years prior, in 89 BC, the Mithridatic Wars had begun due to a dispute between Mithridates VI of Pontus and Nicomedes III of Bithynia over the Roman province of Cappadocia." I don't think the reader has forgotten from the previous sentence that we're discussing BC dates... in that one paragraph (the first one in Mithridatic Wars) there are 8 "BC"s... surely they don't all need to be there! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:27, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Ealdgyth, I reverted your change because I couldn't see a pattern to your removals. I had no clue why you'd just decided to rip out half (or more) of the BCs and leave the rest. One sentence has no BC, the next sentence there is a BC. "CE" doesn't help me understand your change when it's not a simply copy-edit or tidying of prose. I'll go through, leave a single BC per paragraph or section (depends) and remove the rest. Mr rnddude (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)