derek-thomas/squad-v1.1-t5-question-generation huggingface dataset:
The internal unrest reached its most serious state, however, in the two civil wars that were caused by the clash between generals Gaius Marius and Lucius Cornelius Sulla starting from 88 BC. In the Battle of the Colline Gate at the very door of the city of Rome, a Roman army under Sulla bested an army of the Marius supporters and entered the city. Sulla's actions marked a watershed in the willingness of Roman troops to wage war against one another that was to pave the way for the wars which ultimately overthrew the Republic, and caused the founding of the Roman Empire.

Question: What type of war was caused by the clash of two generals? Question: In what year did Marius and Sull begin to clash? Question: In what specific section of Rome did the Battle of the Colline Gate take place? Question: Who was defeated in the Battle of the Colline Gate? Question: What can be considered one of the causes that led to the downfall of the Roman Republic?
Mithridates the Great was the ruler of Pontus, a large kingdom in Asia Minor (modern Turkey), from 120 to 63 BC. Mithridates antagonised Rome by seeking to expand his kingdom, and Rome for her part seemed equally eager for war and the spoils and prestige that it might bring. In 88 BC, Mithridates ordered the killing of a majority of the 80,000 Romans living in his kingdom. The massacre was the official reason given for the commencement of hostilities in the First Mithridatic War. The Roman general Lucius Cornelius Sulla forced Mithridates out of Greece proper, but then had to return to Italy to answer the internal threat posed by his rival, Gaius Marius. A peace was made between Rome and Pontus, but this proved only a temporary lull.

Question: Who was the leader of Pontus in the year 85 BC? Question: When was the last year of Mithridates the Great's reign? Question: How did the ruler of Pontus anger Rome? Question: How many Romans lived in Mithridate the Great's kingdom in 88 BC? Question: With which individual did Lucius Cornelius have a rivalry?
During his term as praetor in the Iberian Peninsula (modern Portugal and Spain), Pompey's contemporary Julius Caesar defeated two local tribes in battle. After his term as consul in 59 BC, he was appointed to a five-year term as the proconsular Governor of Cisalpine Gaul (part of current northern Italy), Transalpine Gaul (current southern France) and Illyria (part of the modern Balkans). Not content with an idle governorship, Caesar strove to find reason to invade Gaul (modern France and Belgium), which would give him the dramatic military success he sought. When two local tribes began to migrate on a route that would take them near (not into) the Roman province of Transalpine Gaul, Caesar had the barely sufficient excuse he needed for his Gallic Wars, fought between 58 BC and 49 BC.

Question: What military leader was Julius Caesar a contemporary of? Question: Who held  a term as praetor in the Iberian Peninsula? Question: When did Julius Caesar's term as consul end? Question: Why did Julius Caesar wish to invade Gaul? Question: What was the reasoning Julius Caesar used to start the Gallic Wars?
By 59 BC an unofficial political alliance known as the First Triumvirate was formed between Gaius Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus, and Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus ("Pompey the Great") to share power and influence. In 53 BC, Crassus launched a Roman invasion of the Parthian Empire (modern Iraq and Iran). After initial successes, he marched his army deep into the desert; but here his army was cut off deep in enemy territory, surrounded and slaughtered at the Battle of Carrhae in which Crassus himself perished. The death of Crassus removed some of the balance in the Triumvirate and, consequently, Caesar and Pompey began to move apart. While Caesar was fighting in Gaul, Pompey proceeded with a legislative agenda for Rome that revealed that he was at best ambivalent towards Caesar and perhaps now covertly allied with Caesar's political enemies. In 51 BC, some Roman senators demanded that Caesar not be permitted to stand for consul unless he turned over control of his armies to the state, which would have left Caesar defenceless before his enemies. Caesar chose civil war over laying down his command and facing trial.

Question: When was the invasion of the Parthian Empire begun? Question: Who started the invasion of the Parthian Empire? Question: In what battle did Marcus Licinius Crassus die? Question: Who was believed to have had a secret allegiance with enemies of Julius Caesar? Question: What did the senators request of Caesar in order for him to stand for consul?
By the spring of 49 BC, the hardened legions of Caesar crossed the river Rubicon, the legal boundary of Roman Italy beyond which no commander might bring his army, and swept down the Italian peninsula towards Rome, while Pompey ordered the abandonment of Rome. Afterwards Caesar turned his attention to the Pompeian stronghold of Hispania (modern Spain) but decided to tackle Pompey himself in Greece. Pompey initially defeated Caesar, but failed to follow up on the victory, and was decisively defeated at the Battle of Pharsalus in 48 BC, despite outnumbering Caesar's forces two to one, albeit with inferior quality troops. Pompey fled again, this time to Egypt, where he was murdered.

Question: During what year did Caesar's armies cross the river Rubicon? Question: Who decided to attack Pompey in Greece? Question: Who would be seen as having been defeated in the Battle of Pharsalus? Question: In which year did The Battle of Pharsalus take place? Question: In what country did Pompey die in?
Caesar was now the primary figure of the Roman state, enforcing and entrenching his powers. His enemies feared that he had ambitions to become an autocratic ruler. Arguing that the Roman Republic was in danger, a group of senators hatched a conspiracy and assassinated Caesar at a meeting of the Senate in March 44 BC.  Mark Antony, Caesar's lieutenant, condemned Caesar's assassination, and war broke out between the two factions. Antony was denounced as a public enemy, and Caesar's adopted son and chosen heir, Gaius Octavianus, was entrusted with the command of the war against him. At the Battle of Mutina Mark Antony was defeated by the consuls Hirtius and Pansa, who were both killed.

Question: Who was now considered to be the primary figure in the Roman state? Question: Why did the Roman senators wish to have Caesar assassinated? Question: Which group of people conspired against Caesar in order to have him assassinated? Question: When did Julius Caesar die? Question: Which former lieutenant of Caesar was considered a public threat after Caesar was assassinated?
However, civil war flared again when the Second Triumvirate of Octavian, Lepidus and Mark Antony failed. The ambitious Octavian built a power base of patronage and then launched a campaign against Mark Antony. At the naval Battle of Actium off the coast of Greece, Octavian decisively defeated Antony and Cleopatra. Octavian was granted a series of special powers including sole "imperium" within the city of Rome, permanent consular powers and credit for every Roman military victory, since all future generals were assumed to be acting under his command. In 27 BC Octavian was granted the use of the names "Augustus" and "Princeps", indicating his primary status above all other Romans, and he adopted the title "Imperator Caesar" making him the first Roman Emperor.

Question: What failure caused the the flares of civil war to spark up again? Question: Who defeated Cleopatra and Mark Antony at the Battle of Actium? Question: Which individual was granted permanent consular powers? Question: In what year was Octavian first allowed to use the names Augustus and Princeps? Question: Who has been designated as the first Emperor of Rome?
The last king of the Roman Kingdom, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, was overthrown in 509 BC by a group of noblemen led by Lucius Junius Brutus. Tarquin made a number of attempts to retake the throne, including the Tarquinian conspiracy, the war with Veii and Tarquinii and finally the war between Rome and Clusium, all of which failed to achieve Tarquin's objectives. The most important constitutional change during the transition from kingdom to republic concerned the chief magistrate. Before the revolution, a king would be elected by the senators for a life term. Now, two consuls were elected by the citizens for an annual term. Each consul would check his colleague, and their limited term in office would open them up to prosecution if they abused the powers of their office. Consular political powers, when exercised conjointly with a consular colleague, were no different from those of the old king.

Question: Who was considered to be the last king of the Roman Kingdom? Question: When did the last king of the Roman Kingdom lose his seat of power? Question: Who would elect a king in the Roman Kingdom prior to the revolution? Question: What was the length of a term that a king would be elected for in the Roman Kingdom? Question: Who were the joint consulars considered to be an equal of politically?
In 494 BC, the city was at war with two neighboring tribes. The plebeian soldiers refused to march against the enemy, and instead seceded to the Aventine Hill. The plebeians demanded the right to elect their own officials. The patricians agreed, and the plebeians returned to the battlefield. The plebeians called these new officials "plebeian tribunes". The tribunes would have two assistants, called "plebeian aediles". During the 5th century BC, a series of reforms were passed. The result of these reforms was that any law passed by the plebeian would have the full force of law. In 443 BC, the censorship was created. From 375 BC to 371 BC, the republic experienced a constitutional crisis during which the tribunes used their vetoes to prevent the election of senior magistrates.

Question: In what year was the city in conflict with two nearby tribes? Question: Which group of people requested the ability to elect officials? Question: What were the assistants to the plebeian tribunes named? Question: During what century were reformed passed that allowed laws passed by the plebeians to have the full force of the law? Question: Who used the vetoes that they had been given to prevent the appointment of magistrates?
After the consulship had been opened to the plebeians, the plebeians were able to hold both the dictatorship and the censorship. Plebiscites of 342 BC placed limits on political offices; an individual could hold only one office at a time, and ten years must elapse between the end of his official term and his re-election. Further laws attempted to relieve the burden of debt from plebeians by banning interest on loans. In 337 BC, the first plebeian praetor was elected. During these years, the tribunes and the senators grew increasingly close. The senate realised the need to use plebeian officials to accomplish desired goals. To win over the tribunes, the senators gave the tribunes a great deal of power and the tribunes began to feel obligated to the senate. As the tribunes and the senators grew closer, plebeian senators were often able to secure the tribunate for members of their own families. In time, the tribunate became a stepping stone to higher office.

Question: What year were limits placed upon plebeians that prevented them from holding more than one office concurrently? Question: What could no longer be associated with debt after laws were passed preventing it? Question: What year saw the election of a plebeian to the office of praetor? Question: How did senators attempt to gain the favor of the tribunes? Question: What was considered a pathway to holding a higher office?
Shortly before 312 BCE, the Plebeian Council enacted the Plebiscitum Ovinium. During the early republic, only consuls could appoint new senators. This initiative, however, transferred this power to the censors. It also required the censor to appoint any newly elected magistrate to the senate. By this point, plebeians were already holding a significant number of magisterial offices. Thus, the number of plebeian senators probably increased quickly. However, it remained difficult for a plebeian to enter the senate if he was not from a well-known political family, as a new patrician-like plebeian aristocracy emerged. The old nobility existed through the force of law, because only patricians were allowed to stand for high office. The new nobility existed due to the organization of society. As such, only a revolution could overthrow this new structure.

Question: In what year was the Plebiscitum Ovinium initiative enacted? Question: What initiative provided censors with the abillity to appoint new senators? Question: Who could a newly elected magistrate expect to be appointed by? Question: Who had already held a large amount of magisterial offices? Question: Who was allowed to be elected to high office positions?
By 287 BC, the economic condition of the average plebeian had become poor. The problem appears to have centered around widespread indebtedness. The plebeians demanded relief, but the senators refused to address their situation. The result was the final plebeian secession. The plebeians seceded to the Janiculum hill. To end the secession, a dictator was appointed. The dictator passed a law (the Lex Hortensia), which ended the requirement that the patrician senators must agree before any bill could be considered by the Plebeian Council. This was not the first law to require that an act of the Plebeian Council have the full force of law. The Plebeian Council acquired this power during a modification to the original Valerian law in 449 BC. The significance of this law was in the fact that it robbed the patricians of their final weapon over the plebeians. The result was that control over the state fell, not onto the shoulders of voters, but to the new plebeian nobility.

Question: What was the economic status of your typical plebeian in 287 BC? Question: Who refused to concern themselves with the plebeians debt situation? Question: What did the patrician senators refusal to address the accumulating debt of the plebeians lead to? Question: What law was passed that allowed the Plebeian Council to consider a bill without the approval of the patrician senators?
The plebeians had finally achieved political equality with the patricians. However, the plight of the average plebeian had not changed. A small number of plebeian families achieved the same standing that the old aristocratic patrician families had always had, but the new plebeian aristocrats became as uninterested in the plight of the average plebeian as the old patrician aristocrats had always been. The plebeians rebelled by leaving Rome and refusing to return until they had more rights. The patricians then noticed how much they needed the plebeians and accepted their terms. The plebeians then returned to Rome and continued their work.

Question: Which group of people were now considered to be politically equal with the plebeians? Question: How many plebeian families had an identical standing as the old aristocratic patrician families? Question: Which group of people rebelled by vacating Rome? Question: What did the rebelling plebeians want before they returned to Rome?
The Hortensian Law deprived the patricians of their last weapon against the plebeians, and thus resolved the last great political question of the era. No such important political changes occurred between 287 BC and 133 BC. The important laws of this era were still enacted by the senate. In effect, the plebeians were satisfied with the possession of power, but did not care to use it. The senate was supreme during this era because the era was dominated by questions of foreign and military policy. This was the most militarily active era of the Roman Republic.

Question: What years did no important political changes happen during? Question: Who enacted crucial laws during this period of time? Question: What group of people often failed to use the power that was given to them? Question: What was a political element that satiated the plebeians? Question: Why was the senate considered to be supreme during this time?
In the final decades of this era many plebeians grew poorer. The long military campaigns had forced citizens to leave their farms to fight, while their farms fell into disrepair. The landed aristocracy began buying bankrupted farms at discounted prices. As commodity prices fell, many farmers could no longer operate their farms at a profit. The result was the ultimate bankruptcy of countless farmers. Masses of unemployed plebeians soon began to flood into Rome, and thus into the ranks of the legislative assemblies. Their poverty usually led them to vote for the candidate who offered them the most. A new culture of dependency was emerging, in which citizens would look to any populist leader for relief.

Question: What had caused citizens to vacate their farms? Question: Who had bought the now bankrupt farms? Question: What caused the bankruptcy of many farmers during this era? Question: How could a candidate assure the vote of a poverty stricken plebeian? Question: What type of culture was a side effect of the rampant poverty of the average plebeian?
Tiberius Gracchus was elected tribune in 133 BC. He attempted to enact a law which would have limited the amount of land that any individual could own. The aristocrats, who stood to lose an enormous amount of money, were bitterly opposed to this proposal. Tiberius submitted this law to the Plebeian Council, but the law was vetoed by a tribune named Marcus Octavius. Tiberius then used the Plebeian Council to impeach Octavius. The theory, that a representative of the people ceases to be one when he acts against the wishes of the people, was counter to Roman constitutional theory. If carried to its logical end, this theory would remove all constitutional restraints on the popular will, and put the state under the absolute control of a temporary popular majority. His law was enacted, but Tiberius was murdered with 300 of his associates when he stood for reelection to the tribunate.

Question: Who had tried to enact a law that places a limit on the amount of property any single individual could possess? Question: To what position was Tiberius Gracchus elected? Question: Which tribune was impeached by the Plebeian Council? Question: What was considered to be the opposite of Roman constitutional theory? Question: When was Tiberius Gracchus murdered?
Tiberius' brother Gaius was elected tribune in 123 BC. Gaius Gracchus' ultimate goal was to weaken the senate and to strengthen the democratic forces. In the past, for example, the senate would eliminate political rivals either by establishing special judicial commissions or by passing a senatus consultum ultimum ("ultimate decree of the senate"). Both devices would allow the Senate to bypass the ordinary due process rights that all citizens had. Gaius outlawed the judicial commissions, and declared the senatus consultum ultimum to be unconstitutional. Gaius then proposed a law which would grant citizenship rights to Rome's Italian allies. This last proposal was not popular with the plebeians and he lost much of his support. He stood for election to a third term in 121 BC, but was defeated and then murdered by representatives of the senate with 3,000 of his supporters on Capitoline Hill in Rome. Though the senate retained control, the Gracchi had strengthened the political influence of the plebeians.

Question: In what year was Gaius elected to office? Question: What is considered to be the end game of Gaius Gracchus? Question: Who brought forward a law that would given citizenship right to Italian allies of Rome? Question: Which elected official lost the election in 121 BC? Question: What was the location of the Gaius Gracchus murder?
In 118 BC, King Micipsa of Numidia (current-day Algeria and Tunisia) died. He was succeeded by two legitimate sons, Adherbal and Hiempsal, and an illegitimate son, Jugurtha. Micipsa divided his kingdom between these three sons. Jugurtha, however, turned on his brothers, killing Hiempsal and driving Adherbal out of Numidia. Adherbal fled to Rome for assistance, and initially Rome mediated a division of the country between the two brothers. Eventually, Jugurtha renewed his offensive, leading to a long and inconclusive war with Rome. He also bribed several Roman commanders, and at least two tribunes, before and during the war. His nemesis, Gaius Marius, a legate from a virtually unknown provincial family, returned from the war in Numidia and was elected consul in 107 BC over the objections of the aristocratic senators. Marius invaded Numidia and brought the war to a quick end, capturing Jugurtha in the process. The apparent incompetence of the Senate, and the brilliance of Marius, had been put on full display. The populares party took full advantage of this opportunity by allying itself with Marius.

Question: Who was the illegitimate offspring of the King Micipsa of Numidia? Question: Who was Jugurtha's rival? Question: When was Gaius Marius elected to the position of consul? Question: Who did not agree with the election of Gaius Marius? Question: Which individual did the populares part have an allegiance with?
Several years later, in 88 BC, a Roman army was sent to put down an emerging Asian power, king Mithridates of Pontus. The army, however, was defeated. One of Marius' old quaestors, Lucius Cornelius Sulla, had been elected consul for the year, and was ordered by the senate to assume command of the war against Mithridates. Marius, a member of the "populares" party, had a tribune revoke Sulla's command of the war against Mithridates. Sulla, a member of the aristocratic ("optimates") party, brought his army back to Italy and marched on Rome. Sulla was so angry at Marius' tribune that he passed a law intended to permanently weaken the tribunate. He then returned to his war against Mithridates. With Sulla gone, the populares under Marius and Lucius Cornelius Cinna soon took control of the city.

Question: In what year was a Roman army dispatched to terminate the King of Pontus? Question: Who was ordered by the senate to become commander in the conflict with King Mithridates? Question: What political party did Lucius Cornelius Sulla belong to? Question: Who had successfully passed a law whose sole purpose was to lessen the power of the tribunate? Question: What happened after Sulla returned to the conflict with Mithridates?
During the period in which the populares party controlled the city, they flouted convention by re-electing Marius consul several times without observing the customary ten-year interval between offices. They also transgressed the established oligarchy by advancing unelected individuals to magisterial office, and by substituting magisterial edicts for popular legislation. Sulla soon made peace with Mithridates. In 83 BC, he returned to Rome, overcame all resistance, and recaptured the city. Sulla and his supporters then slaughtered most of Marius' supporters. Sulla, having observed the violent results of radical popular reforms, was naturally conservative. As such, he sought to strengthen the aristocracy, and by extension the senate. Sulla made himself dictator, passed a series of constitutional reforms, resigned the dictatorship, and served one last term as consul. He died in 78 BC.

Question: How many years was normal to span between offices prior to the populares controlling the city? Question: Which leader had achieved peace with Mithridates? Question: In what year did Sulla succesfully take over the populares controlled city? Question: Who were slaughtered upon the arrival of Sulla in Rome? Question: In what year did Sulla die?