another thing i will say about my intro rome class is that we learned about how one aspect of the culture of war and violence was the tradition of a soldier wearing the armor of his conquered enemy as a trophy, displaying it as a sort of prize. famous examples of this include romulus (i believe he was the earliest one to do this and kind of establised this as a practice), and turnus wearing the armor of aeneas's war buddy pallas (which sent aeneas over the edge/gave him the motivation to kill turnus).
it made me think of how cato and clove got body armor as their sponsor gift but obviously with her gone, cato would have had to find her armor in her bag and know she could never use it. now based on their movie actors they are obviously very different sizes and i'm not sure what use cato would've had for her armor, it probably made more sense to discard it (because it was both 1. essentially useless and 2. a painful reminder of his fallen ally), but i do wonder if he might've kept the bag the armor came in to carry a piece of her around with him similar to what the romans did - except with the opposite intentions, as a sign of friendship towards her and not as a way to celebrate her death.
a thought that just occurred to me is the fact that thresh literally carried off the body armor of his fallen foe that he killed - not on purpose of course/with the intentions that the romans had (he would've had no idea what was in the bag and also it isn't his style to flaunt his "victory" over clove). and it is heavily implied that cato killed him both to claim his sponsor gift back and perhaps to avenge her. you know, the same way aeneas goes mad when he sees turnus wearing pallas's war belt and kills him in a fit of rage.
