Kwana is a time of ingathering of the people to reaffirm the bonds between them
Answer: cual es la pregunta o la duda ?
Explanation:
Answer: The fights between gladiators in ancient Rome were brutal. It was not like a football game (American or otherwise) where it would be assumed that both sides would go home with just a couple of bruises. Death was a fairly common occurrence at a gladiatorial game, but that doesn't mean it was inevitable. One gladiator might be lying prone in the blood-absorbing sand of the arena, with the other gladiator holding a sword (or whichever weapon he was assigned) at his throat. Instead of simply plunging in the weapon and consigning his opponent to death, the winning gladiator would look for a signal to tell him what to do. The winning gladiator would get his signal—not from the crowd as illustrated in the famous 19th century painting by Jean-Léon Gérôme (1824–1904)—but rather from the referee of the game, the editor (or editor muneris), who might also be a senator, emperor or another politico. He was the one to make the final decisions about the fates of the gladiators in the arena. However, since the games were meant to curry public favor, the editor had to pay attention to the wishes of the audience. Much of the audience attended such brutal events for the single purpose of witnessing the bravery of a gladiator in the face of death.By the way, gladiators never said "Morituri te salutant" ("Those who are about to die salute you"). That was said once to Emperor Claudius (10 BC–54 CE) on the occasion of a staged naval battle, not gladiatorial combat.
<h2>
<em><u>Ways to End a Fight Between Gladiators</u></em></h2>
Gladiatorial contests were dangerous and potentially fatal, but not as often fatal as Hollywood would have us believe: Gladiators were rented from their training school (ludus) and a good gladiator was expensive to replace, so most battles did not end in death. There were only two ways that a gladiatorial battle could be ended—either one gladiator won or it was a draw—but it was the editor who had the final say on whether the loser died on the field or went on to fight another day.
The editor had three established ways to make his decision.
He might have established rules (lex) in advance of the game. If the fight's sponsors wanted a fight to the death, they had to be willing to compensate the lanista (trainer) who had rented out the dead gladiator.
He could accept the surrender of one of the gladiators. After having lost or cast aside his weapons, the losing gladiator would fall to his knees and raise his index finger (ad digitatum).
He could listen to the audience. When a gladiator went down, cries of Habet, Hoc habet! (He's had it!), and shouts of Mitte! (Let him go!) or Lugula! (Kill him!) could be heard.
A game that ended in death was known as a sine remissione (without dismissal).
Thumbs
HP 7 (Deathly Hallows)
1- “It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to power are those who have never sought it. Those who, like you, have leadership thrust upon them, and take up the mantle because they must, and find to their own surprise that they wear it well.” Harry was the leader of the operation throughout the entire novel. This vividly written and intriguing quote was indirectly targeted at him because he was given the power even though he didn't ask for it.
2- What was the point of the wizarding war? What was the cause of muggleborn prejudices? Why was Umbrige able to conjure a Patronus while interrogating muggleborns? Who was the real hero? How was death a major object of this novel? Wizards are humans, so why weren't all humans treated equally? How does this relate to the real world?
3- The Deathly Hallows created a dark and foreboding atmosphere for the readers. Even at the end of the story, there was so much death and destruction that there was no way for the audience to feel completely contented and happy with the ending. Throughout the story, characters were being tortured, maimed, and dying. No one was safe and it was overly shocking how quickly the world fell.
4- In my opinion, this was an amazing story, the best of the Harry Potter franchise. The writing was vivid and meaningful, and characters were memorable and well-crafted. J.K. Rowling gave readers the ability to get attached to the characters and the story. It was amazing that she had the ability to make us feel what the characters feel.
