nc33/multispan_quoref huggingface dataset:
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: Whose forces did Egyptian Sultan Qalawun prevent from joining the Mongols?
Answer: King Hugh of Cyprus, Bohemond of Antioch
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: What year was a fortress captured as retaliation for the Second battle of Homs?
Answer: 1285
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: What is the name of the leader who brought Armenians with the Mongols who returned to Jerusalem?
Answer: Leo III
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: What is the name of the person who prevented the forces of Antioch from joining the Mongols?
Answer: Qalawun
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: What is the last name of the person who positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols?
Answer: Qalawun
Without support from the Europeans, some Franks in Outremer, particularly the Knights Hospitaller of the fortress of Marqab, and to some extent the Franks of Cyprus and Antioch, attempted to join in combined operations with the Mongols in 1280–1281. The death of the Egyptian leader Baibars in 1277 led to disorganization in the Muslim territories, making conditions ripe for a new action by other factions in the Holy Land. The Mongols seized the opportunity, organized a new invasion of Syria, and in September 1280 occupied Bagras and Darbsak, followed by Aleppo on October 20. The Mongol leader Abaqa, taking advantage of his momentum, sent envoys to Edward I of England, the Franks of Acre, King Hugh of Cyprus, and Bohemond VII of Tripoli (son of Bohemond VI), requesting their support for the campaign. But the Crusaders were not organized enough themselves to be of much help. In Acre, the Patriarch's Vicar replied that the city was suffering from hunger, and that the king of Jerusalem was already embroiled in another war. Local Knights Hospitaller from Marqab (in the area which had previously been Antioch/Tripoli) were able to make raids into the Beqaa Valley, as far as the Mamluk-held Krak des Chevaliers in 1280 and 1281. Hugh and Bohemond of Antioch mobilized their armies, but their forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor, the new Egyptian Sultan Qalawun. He advanced north from Egypt in March 1281, positioned his own army between the Franks and Mongols, and then further divided the potential allies by renewing a truce with the Barons of Acre on May 3, 1281, extending it for another ten years and ten months (a truce he would later breach). He also renewed a second 10-year truce with Bohemond VII of Tripoli on July 16, 1281, and affirmed pilgrim access to Jerusalem.In September 1281 the Mongols returned, with 50,000 of their own troops, plus 30,000 others including Armenians under Leo III, Georgians, and 200 Knights Hospitaller from Marqab, who sent a contingent even though the Franks of Acre had agreed a truce with the Mamluks. The Mongols and their auxiliary troops fought against the Mamluks at the Second Battle of Homs on October 30, 1281, but the encounter was indecisive, with the Sultan suffering heavy losses. In retaliation, Qalawun later besieged and captured the Hospitaller fortress of Marqab in 1285.

Question: What are the last names of the people whose forces were prevented from joining those of the Mongols by Baibars' successor?
Answer: Hugh, Bohemond
Abaqa died in 1282 and was briefly replaced by his brother Tekuder, who had converted to Islam. Tekuder reversed Abaqa's policy of seeking an alliance with the Franks, offering instead an alliance to the Mamluk Sultan Qalawun, who continued his own advance, capturing the Hospitaller fortress of Margat in 1285, Lattakia in 1287, and the County of Tripoli in 1289. However, Tekuder's pro-Muslim stance was not popular, and in 1284, Abaqa's Buddhist son Arghun, with the support of the Great Khan Kublai, led a revolt and had Tekuder executed. Arghun then revived the idea of an alliance with the West, and sent multiple envoys to Europe.The first of Arghun's embassies was led by Isa Kelemechi, a Nestorian scientist who had been head of Kublai Khan's Office of Western Astronomy. Kelemechi met with Pope Honorius IV in 1285, offering to "remove" the Saracens (Muslims) and divide "the land of Sham, namely Egypt" with the Franks. The second embassy, and probably the most famous, was that of the elderly cleric Rabban Bar Sauma, who had been visiting the Ilkhanate during a remarkable pilgrimage from China to Jerusalem.Through Bar Sauma and other later envoys, such as Buscarello de Ghizolfi, Arghun promised the European leaders that if Jerusalem were conquered, he would have himself baptized and would return Jerusalem to the Christians. Bar Sauma was greeted warmly by the European monarchs, but Western Europe was no longer as interested in the Crusades, and the mission to form an alliance was ultimately fruitless. England did respond by sending a representative, Geoffrey of Langley, who had been a member of Edward I's Crusade 20 years earlier, and was sent to the Mongol court as an ambassador in 1291.

Question: What is the name of the person whose brother was executed?
Answer: Abaqa
Abaqa died in 1282 and was briefly replaced by his brother Tekuder, who had converted to Islam. Tekuder reversed Abaqa's policy of seeking an alliance with the Franks, offering instead an alliance to the Mamluk Sultan Qalawun, who continued his own advance, capturing the Hospitaller fortress of Margat in 1285, Lattakia in 1287, and the County of Tripoli in 1289. However, Tekuder's pro-Muslim stance was not popular, and in 1284, Abaqa's Buddhist son Arghun, with the support of the Great Khan Kublai, led a revolt and had Tekuder executed. Arghun then revived the idea of an alliance with the West, and sent multiple envoys to Europe.The first of Arghun's embassies was led by Isa Kelemechi, a Nestorian scientist who had been head of Kublai Khan's Office of Western Astronomy. Kelemechi met with Pope Honorius IV in 1285, offering to "remove" the Saracens (Muslims) and divide "the land of Sham, namely Egypt" with the Franks. The second embassy, and probably the most famous, was that of the elderly cleric Rabban Bar Sauma, who had been visiting the Ilkhanate during a remarkable pilgrimage from China to Jerusalem.Through Bar Sauma and other later envoys, such as Buscarello de Ghizolfi, Arghun promised the European leaders that if Jerusalem were conquered, he would have himself baptized and would return Jerusalem to the Christians. Bar Sauma was greeted warmly by the European monarchs, but Western Europe was no longer as interested in the Crusades, and the mission to form an alliance was ultimately fruitless. England did respond by sending a representative, Geoffrey of Langley, who had been a member of Edward I's Crusade 20 years earlier, and was sent to the Mongol court as an ambassador in 1291.

Question: What is the name of the person whose original idea of an alliance with the West was revived?
Answer: Abaqa
Abaqa died in 1282 and was briefly replaced by his brother Tekuder, who had converted to Islam. Tekuder reversed Abaqa's policy of seeking an alliance with the Franks, offering instead an alliance to the Mamluk Sultan Qalawun, who continued his own advance, capturing the Hospitaller fortress of Margat in 1285, Lattakia in 1287, and the County of Tripoli in 1289. However, Tekuder's pro-Muslim stance was not popular, and in 1284, Abaqa's Buddhist son Arghun, with the support of the Great Khan Kublai, led a revolt and had Tekuder executed. Arghun then revived the idea of an alliance with the West, and sent multiple envoys to Europe.The first of Arghun's embassies was led by Isa Kelemechi, a Nestorian scientist who had been head of Kublai Khan's Office of Western Astronomy. Kelemechi met with Pope Honorius IV in 1285, offering to "remove" the Saracens (Muslims) and divide "the land of Sham, namely Egypt" with the Franks. The second embassy, and probably the most famous, was that of the elderly cleric Rabban Bar Sauma, who had been visiting the Ilkhanate during a remarkable pilgrimage from China to Jerusalem.Through Bar Sauma and other later envoys, such as Buscarello de Ghizolfi, Arghun promised the European leaders that if Jerusalem were conquered, he would have himself baptized and would return Jerusalem to the Christians. Bar Sauma was greeted warmly by the European monarchs, but Western Europe was no longer as interested in the Crusades, and the mission to form an alliance was ultimately fruitless. England did respond by sending a representative, Geoffrey of Langley, who had been a member of Edward I's Crusade 20 years earlier, and was sent to the Mongol court as an ambassador in 1291.

Question: What is the name of the person who would have himself baptized and would return Jerusalem to the Christians?
Answer: Arghun
After Arghun's death, he was followed in rapid succession by two brief and fairly ineffective leaders, one of whom only held power for a few months. Stability was restored when Arghun's son Ghazan took power in 1295, though to secure cooperation from other influential Mongols, he made a public conversion to Islam when he took the throne, marking a major turning point in the state religion of the Ilkhanate. Despite being an official Muslim, however, Ghazan remained tolerant of multiple religions, and worked to maintain good relations with his Christian vassal states such as Cilician Armenia and Georgia.
In 1299, he made the first of what were to be three attempts to invade Syria. As he launched his new invasion, he also sent letters to the Franks of Cyprus (Henry II, King of Cyprus; and the heads of the military orders), inviting them to come join him in his attack on the Mamluks in Syria. The Mongols successfully took the city of Aleppo, and were there joined by their vassal King Hethum II, whose forces participated in the rest of the offensive. The Mongols soundly defeated the Mamluks in the Battle of Wadi al-Khazandar,  on December 23 or 24, 1299. This success in Syria led to wild rumors in Europe that the Mongols had successfully re-captured the Holy Land, and had even conquered the Mamluks in Egypt and were on a mission to conquer Tunisia in northern Africa. But in reality, Jerusalem had been neither taken nor even besieged. All that had been managed were some Mongol raids into Palestine in early 1300. The raids went as far as Gaza, passing through several towns, probably including Jerusalem. But when the Egyptians again advanced from Cairo in May, the Mongols retreated without resistance.In July 1300, the Crusaders launched naval operations to press the advantage. A fleet of sixteen galleys with some smaller vessels was equipped in Cyprus, commanded by King Henry of Cyprus, accompanied by his brother Amalric, Prince of Tyre, the heads of the military orders, and Ghazan's ambassador "Chial" (Isol the Pisan). The ships left Famagusta on July 20, 1300, to raid the coasts of Egypt and Syria: Rosette, Alexandria, Acre, Tortosa, and Maraclea, before returning to Cyprus.

Question: What did the wild rumors in Europe claim the Mongols had successfully re-captured?
Answer: Jerusalem
After Arghun's death, he was followed in rapid succession by two brief and fairly ineffective leaders, one of whom only held power for a few months. Stability was restored when Arghun's son Ghazan took power in 1295, though to secure cooperation from other influential Mongols, he made a public conversion to Islam when he took the throne, marking a major turning point in the state religion of the Ilkhanate. Despite being an official Muslim, however, Ghazan remained tolerant of multiple religions, and worked to maintain good relations with his Christian vassal states such as Cilician Armenia and Georgia.
In 1299, he made the first of what were to be three attempts to invade Syria. As he launched his new invasion, he also sent letters to the Franks of Cyprus (Henry II, King of Cyprus; and the heads of the military orders), inviting them to come join him in his attack on the Mamluks in Syria. The Mongols successfully took the city of Aleppo, and were there joined by their vassal King Hethum II, whose forces participated in the rest of the offensive. The Mongols soundly defeated the Mamluks in the Battle of Wadi al-Khazandar,  on December 23 or 24, 1299. This success in Syria led to wild rumors in Europe that the Mongols had successfully re-captured the Holy Land, and had even conquered the Mamluks in Egypt and were on a mission to conquer Tunisia in northern Africa. But in reality, Jerusalem had been neither taken nor even besieged. All that had been managed were some Mongol raids into Palestine in early 1300. The raids went as far as Gaza, passing through several towns, probably including Jerusalem. But when the Egyptians again advanced from Cairo in May, the Mongols retreated without resistance.In July 1300, the Crusaders launched naval operations to press the advantage. A fleet of sixteen galleys with some smaller vessels was equipped in Cyprus, commanded by King Henry of Cyprus, accompanied by his brother Amalric, Prince of Tyre, the heads of the military orders, and Ghazan's ambassador "Chial" (Isol the Pisan). The ships left Famagusta on July 20, 1300, to raid the coasts of Egypt and Syria: Rosette, Alexandria, Acre, Tortosa, and Maraclea, before returning to Cyprus.

Question: Who sent letters to the Franks of Cyprus?
Answer: Ghazan
In the 14th century, diplomatic contact continued between the Franks and the Mongols, until the Ilkhanate dissolved in the 1330s, and the ravages of the Black Death in Europe caused contact with the East to be severed. A few marital alliances between Christian rulers and the Mongols of the Golden Horde continued, such as when the Byzantine emperor Andronicus II gave daughters in marriage to Toqto'a (d. 1312) and later to his successor Uzbek (1312–1341).After Abu Sa'id, relations between Christian princes and the Ilkhanate became very sparse. Abu Sa'id died in 1335 with neither heir nor successor, and the Ilkhanate lost its status after his death, becoming a plethora of little kingdoms run by Mongols, Turks, and Persians.In 1336, an embassy to the French Pope Benedict XII in Avignon was sent by Toghun Temür, the last Yuan emperor in Dadu. The embassy was led by two Genoese travelers in the service of the Mongol emperor, who carried letters representing that the Mongols had been eight years (since Archbishop John of Montecorvino's death) without a spiritual guide, and earnestly desired one. Pope Benedict appointed four ecclesiastics as his legates to the khan's court. In 1338, a total of 50 ecclesiastics were sent by the pope to Peking, among them John of Marignolli, who returned to Avignon in 1353 with a letter from the Yuan emperor to Pope Innocent VI. But soon, the Han Chinese rose up and drove the Mongols out of China, establishing the Ming Dynasty in 1368. By 1369, all foreign influences, from Mongols to Christians, Manichaeans, and Buddhists, were expelled by the Ming Dynasty.
In the early 15th century, Timur (Tamerlane) resumed relations with Europe, attempting to form an alliance against the Egyptian Mamluks and the Ottoman Empire, and engaged in communications with Charles VI of France and Henry III of Castile, but died in 1405.

Question: What two things did Abu Sa'id not have when he died?
Answer: heir, successor
In the 14th century, diplomatic contact continued between the Franks and the Mongols, until the Ilkhanate dissolved in the 1330s, and the ravages of the Black Death in Europe caused contact with the East to be severed. A few marital alliances between Christian rulers and the Mongols of the Golden Horde continued, such as when the Byzantine emperor Andronicus II gave daughters in marriage to Toqto'a (d. 1312) and later to his successor Uzbek (1312–1341).After Abu Sa'id, relations between Christian princes and the Ilkhanate became very sparse. Abu Sa'id died in 1335 with neither heir nor successor, and the Ilkhanate lost its status after his death, becoming a plethora of little kingdoms run by Mongols, Turks, and Persians.In 1336, an embassy to the French Pope Benedict XII in Avignon was sent by Toghun Temür, the last Yuan emperor in Dadu. The embassy was led by two Genoese travelers in the service of the Mongol emperor, who carried letters representing that the Mongols had been eight years (since Archbishop John of Montecorvino's death) without a spiritual guide, and earnestly desired one. Pope Benedict appointed four ecclesiastics as his legates to the khan's court. In 1338, a total of 50 ecclesiastics were sent by the pope to Peking, among them John of Marignolli, who returned to Avignon in 1353 with a letter from the Yuan emperor to Pope Innocent VI. But soon, the Han Chinese rose up and drove the Mongols out of China, establishing the Ming Dynasty in 1368. By 1369, all foreign influences, from Mongols to Christians, Manichaeans, and Buddhists, were expelled by the Ming Dynasty.
In the early 15th century, Timur (Tamerlane) resumed relations with Europe, attempting to form an alliance against the Egyptian Mamluks and the Ottoman Empire, and engaged in communications with Charles VI of France and Henry III of Castile, but died in 1405.

Question: What was the name of one of the 50 ecclesiastics sent by the pope to Peking who returned to Avignon in 1353 with a letter from the Yuan emperor to Pope Innocent VI?
Answer: Abu Sa'id, John of Marignolli,
In the 14th century, diplomatic contact continued between the Franks and the Mongols, until the Ilkhanate dissolved in the 1330s, and the ravages of the Black Death in Europe caused contact with the East to be severed. A few marital alliances between Christian rulers and the Mongols of the Golden Horde continued, such as when the Byzantine emperor Andronicus II gave daughters in marriage to Toqto'a (d. 1312) and later to his successor Uzbek (1312–1341).After Abu Sa'id, relations between Christian princes and the Ilkhanate became very sparse. Abu Sa'id died in 1335 with neither heir nor successor, and the Ilkhanate lost its status after his death, becoming a plethora of little kingdoms run by Mongols, Turks, and Persians.In 1336, an embassy to the French Pope Benedict XII in Avignon was sent by Toghun Temür, the last Yuan emperor in Dadu. The embassy was led by two Genoese travelers in the service of the Mongol emperor, who carried letters representing that the Mongols had been eight years (since Archbishop John of Montecorvino's death) without a spiritual guide, and earnestly desired one. Pope Benedict appointed four ecclesiastics as his legates to the khan's court. In 1338, a total of 50 ecclesiastics were sent by the pope to Peking, among them John of Marignolli, who returned to Avignon in 1353 with a letter from the Yuan emperor to Pope Innocent VI. But soon, the Han Chinese rose up and drove the Mongols out of China, establishing the Ming Dynasty in 1368. By 1369, all foreign influences, from Mongols to Christians, Manichaeans, and Buddhists, were expelled by the Ming Dynasty.
In the early 15th century, Timur (Tamerlane) resumed relations with Europe, attempting to form an alliance against the Egyptian Mamluks and the Ottoman Empire, and engaged in communications with Charles VI of France and Henry III of Castile, but died in 1405.

Question: What was the name of the emperor who sent a letter to Pope Innocent VI?
Answer: Toghun Temür
Most historians describe the contacts between the Mongol Empire and the Western Europeans as a series of attempts, missed opportunities, and failed negotiations. Christopher Atwood, in the 2004 Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire, summed up the relations between Western Europe and the Mongols: "Despite numerous envoys and the obvious logic of an alliance against mutual enemies, the papacy and the Crusaders never achieved the often-proposed alliance against Islam."A few other historians argue there was an actual alliance, but do not agree on the details: Jean Richard wrote that an alliance began around 1263. Reuven Amitai stated that the closest thing to actual Mongol-Frankish military coordination was when Prince Edward of England attempted to coordinate activities with Abaga in 1271. Amitai also mentioned the other attempts towards cooperation, but said, "In none of these episodes, however, can we speak of Mongols and troops from the Frankish West being on the Syrian mainland at the same time." Timothy May described the alliance as having its peak at the Council of Lyon in 1274, but that it began to unravel in 1275 with the death of Bohemond, and May too admitted that the forces never engaged in joint operations. Alain Demurger, in his own book The Last Templar, said that an alliance was not sealed until 1300.There also continues to be debate about whether or not an alliance would have been a wise idea, and whether the Crusaders at that point in history were even relevant to the Persian-Mongol conflict. The 20th-century historian Glenn Burger said, "The refusal of the Latin Christian states in the area to follow Hethum's example and adapt to changing conditions by allying themselves with the new Mongol empire must stand as one of the saddest of the many failures of Outremer." This was similar to the view of Steven Runciman, who argued, "Had the Mongol alliance been achieved and honestly implemented by the West, the existence of Outremer would almost certainly have been prolonged. The Mameluks would have been crippled if not destroyed; and the Ilkhanate of Persia would have survived as a power friendly to the Christians and the West". However, David Nicolle, describing the Mongols as "potential allies", said that early historians were writing from the benefit of hindsight, and that overall the major players were the Mamluks and the Mongols, with Christians just "pawns in a greater game."

Question: Who did Jean Richard claim had an alliance around 1263?
Answer: Mongol Empire, Western Europeans
Most historians describe the contacts between the Mongol Empire and the Western Europeans as a series of attempts, missed opportunities, and failed negotiations. Christopher Atwood, in the 2004 Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire, summed up the relations between Western Europe and the Mongols: "Despite numerous envoys and the obvious logic of an alliance against mutual enemies, the papacy and the Crusaders never achieved the often-proposed alliance against Islam."A few other historians argue there was an actual alliance, but do not agree on the details: Jean Richard wrote that an alliance began around 1263. Reuven Amitai stated that the closest thing to actual Mongol-Frankish military coordination was when Prince Edward of England attempted to coordinate activities with Abaga in 1271. Amitai also mentioned the other attempts towards cooperation, but said, "In none of these episodes, however, can we speak of Mongols and troops from the Frankish West being on the Syrian mainland at the same time." Timothy May described the alliance as having its peak at the Council of Lyon in 1274, but that it began to unravel in 1275 with the death of Bohemond, and May too admitted that the forces never engaged in joint operations. Alain Demurger, in his own book The Last Templar, said that an alliance was not sealed until 1300.There also continues to be debate about whether or not an alliance would have been a wise idea, and whether the Crusaders at that point in history were even relevant to the Persian-Mongol conflict. The 20th-century historian Glenn Burger said, "The refusal of the Latin Christian states in the area to follow Hethum's example and adapt to changing conditions by allying themselves with the new Mongol empire must stand as one of the saddest of the many failures of Outremer." This was similar to the view of Steven Runciman, who argued, "Had the Mongol alliance been achieved and honestly implemented by the West, the existence of Outremer would almost certainly have been prolonged. The Mameluks would have been crippled if not destroyed; and the Ilkhanate of Persia would have survived as a power friendly to the Christians and the West". However, David Nicolle, describing the Mongols as "potential allies", said that early historians were writing from the benefit of hindsight, and that overall the major players were the Mamluks and the Mongols, with Christians just "pawns in a greater game."

Question: What people would have been crippled by a Mongol Empire and the Western European alliance?
Answer: The Mameluks
Before the creation of the Oregon Territory in 1848, the Oregon Country provisional government, through legislation on June 27, 1844, and December 19, 1845, selected Oregon City as Oregon's first capital. J. Quinn Thornton described an early capitol building as 20 by 40 feet with a platform at one end for the president. One of the private buildings this government used was constructed by John L. Morrison in 1850; it served as a capitol until the government moved to Salem. Governor Joseph Lane affirmed Oregon City's status as capital by proclamation. In 1850, the legislature passed an act designating Salem the capital. However, Governor John P. Gaines refused to relocate and remained in Oregon City along with the Oregon Supreme Court (except Justice Orville C. Pratt) until an act of Congress on May 14, 1852, settled the matter in Salem's favor.
On January 13, 1855, the Oregon Territorial Legislature passed a bill moving the seat of government from Salem to Corvallis. Governor George Law Curry and many others objected to the move, since public buildings in Salem were already under construction. Curry sent the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington, D.C., where Secretary James Guthrie declared the move invalid unless acted on by the United States Congress. Thereafter, Curry and Oregon Secretary of State Benjamin Harding moved back to Salem.
On December 3, 1855, the legislature convened in Corvallis and quickly introduced legislation to move the capital back to Salem. This bill passed on December 15, 1855. Three days later, the legislature re-convened in Salem. However, the statehouse burned down on the 29th, and the legislature re-opened debate about where to seat the capital. They decided to ask the people of the territory to vote on the question. A vote was to be held in June 1856, after which the two cities receiving the most votes would have a runoff. The initial vote set up a runoff between Eugene and Corvallis, but after some ballots were invalidated due to not being cast in accordance with the law, the two winners were Eugene and Salem. An October runoff gave Eugene the most votes, but the earlier vote-tossing led to a low turnout. With such low public participation, the election was ignored, and the capital remained in Salem.A permanent resolution of the capital location issue came in 1864. In 1860, the legislature put the question once again to a popular vote. On a vote in 1862, no city received the 50 percent minimum required by law. In an 1864 election, Salem received 79 percent and was declared the state capital. The Oregon Constitution lists the seat of state government in Article XIV as Marion County, of which Salem is the seat.

Question: What county is listed as the seat of state government in the state that selected Oregon City as its first capital?
Answer: Marion County
Before the creation of the Oregon Territory in 1848, the Oregon Country provisional government, through legislation on June 27, 1844, and December 19, 1845, selected Oregon City as Oregon's first capital. J. Quinn Thornton described an early capitol building as 20 by 40 feet with a platform at one end for the president. One of the private buildings this government used was constructed by John L. Morrison in 1850; it served as a capitol until the government moved to Salem. Governor Joseph Lane affirmed Oregon City's status as capital by proclamation. In 1850, the legislature passed an act designating Salem the capital. However, Governor John P. Gaines refused to relocate and remained in Oregon City along with the Oregon Supreme Court (except Justice Orville C. Pratt) until an act of Congress on May 14, 1852, settled the matter in Salem's favor.
On January 13, 1855, the Oregon Territorial Legislature passed a bill moving the seat of government from Salem to Corvallis. Governor George Law Curry and many others objected to the move, since public buildings in Salem were already under construction. Curry sent the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington, D.C., where Secretary James Guthrie declared the move invalid unless acted on by the United States Congress. Thereafter, Curry and Oregon Secretary of State Benjamin Harding moved back to Salem.
On December 3, 1855, the legislature convened in Corvallis and quickly introduced legislation to move the capital back to Salem. This bill passed on December 15, 1855. Three days later, the legislature re-convened in Salem. However, the statehouse burned down on the 29th, and the legislature re-opened debate about where to seat the capital. They decided to ask the people of the territory to vote on the question. A vote was to be held in June 1856, after which the two cities receiving the most votes would have a runoff. The initial vote set up a runoff between Eugene and Corvallis, but after some ballots were invalidated due to not being cast in accordance with the law, the two winners were Eugene and Salem. An October runoff gave Eugene the most votes, but the earlier vote-tossing led to a low turnout. With such low public participation, the election was ignored, and the capital remained in Salem.A permanent resolution of the capital location issue came in 1864. In 1860, the legislature put the question once again to a popular vote. On a vote in 1862, no city received the 50 percent minimum required by law. In an 1864 election, Salem received 79 percent and was declared the state capital. The Oregon Constitution lists the seat of state government in Article XIV as Marion County, of which Salem is the seat.

Question: In what year did the vote for capital city of the state that had a governor refuse to relocate the capital not have any city receive 50 percent of the vote?
Answer: 1862
Before the creation of the Oregon Territory in 1848, the Oregon Country provisional government, through legislation on June 27, 1844, and December 19, 1845, selected Oregon City as Oregon's first capital. J. Quinn Thornton described an early capitol building as 20 by 40 feet with a platform at one end for the president. One of the private buildings this government used was constructed by John L. Morrison in 1850; it served as a capitol until the government moved to Salem. Governor Joseph Lane affirmed Oregon City's status as capital by proclamation. In 1850, the legislature passed an act designating Salem the capital. However, Governor John P. Gaines refused to relocate and remained in Oregon City along with the Oregon Supreme Court (except Justice Orville C. Pratt) until an act of Congress on May 14, 1852, settled the matter in Salem's favor.
On January 13, 1855, the Oregon Territorial Legislature passed a bill moving the seat of government from Salem to Corvallis. Governor George Law Curry and many others objected to the move, since public buildings in Salem were already under construction. Curry sent the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington, D.C., where Secretary James Guthrie declared the move invalid unless acted on by the United States Congress. Thereafter, Curry and Oregon Secretary of State Benjamin Harding moved back to Salem.
On December 3, 1855, the legislature convened in Corvallis and quickly introduced legislation to move the capital back to Salem. This bill passed on December 15, 1855. Three days later, the legislature re-convened in Salem. However, the statehouse burned down on the 29th, and the legislature re-opened debate about where to seat the capital. They decided to ask the people of the territory to vote on the question. A vote was to be held in June 1856, after which the two cities receiving the most votes would have a runoff. The initial vote set up a runoff between Eugene and Corvallis, but after some ballots were invalidated due to not being cast in accordance with the law, the two winners were Eugene and Salem. An October runoff gave Eugene the most votes, but the earlier vote-tossing led to a low turnout. With such low public participation, the election was ignored, and the capital remained in Salem.A permanent resolution of the capital location issue came in 1864. In 1860, the legislature put the question once again to a popular vote. On a vote in 1862, no city received the 50 percent minimum required by law. In an 1864 election, Salem received 79 percent and was declared the state capital. The Oregon Constitution lists the seat of state government in Article XIV as Marion County, of which Salem is the seat.

Question: What year was Salem declared state capital of the state that was governed by George Law Curry?
Answer: 1864
Before the creation of the Oregon Territory in 1848, the Oregon Country provisional government, through legislation on June 27, 1844, and December 19, 1845, selected Oregon City as Oregon's first capital. J. Quinn Thornton described an early capitol building as 20 by 40 feet with a platform at one end for the president. One of the private buildings this government used was constructed by John L. Morrison in 1850; it served as a capitol until the government moved to Salem. Governor Joseph Lane affirmed Oregon City's status as capital by proclamation. In 1850, the legislature passed an act designating Salem the capital. However, Governor John P. Gaines refused to relocate and remained in Oregon City along with the Oregon Supreme Court (except Justice Orville C. Pratt) until an act of Congress on May 14, 1852, settled the matter in Salem's favor.
On January 13, 1855, the Oregon Territorial Legislature passed a bill moving the seat of government from Salem to Corvallis. Governor George Law Curry and many others objected to the move, since public buildings in Salem were already under construction. Curry sent the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington, D.C., where Secretary James Guthrie declared the move invalid unless acted on by the United States Congress. Thereafter, Curry and Oregon Secretary of State Benjamin Harding moved back to Salem.
On December 3, 1855, the legislature convened in Corvallis and quickly introduced legislation to move the capital back to Salem. This bill passed on December 15, 1855. Three days later, the legislature re-convened in Salem. However, the statehouse burned down on the 29th, and the legislature re-opened debate about where to seat the capital. They decided to ask the people of the territory to vote on the question. A vote was to be held in June 1856, after which the two cities receiving the most votes would have a runoff. The initial vote set up a runoff between Eugene and Corvallis, but after some ballots were invalidated due to not being cast in accordance with the law, the two winners were Eugene and Salem. An October runoff gave Eugene the most votes, but the earlier vote-tossing led to a low turnout. With such low public participation, the election was ignored, and the capital remained in Salem.A permanent resolution of the capital location issue came in 1864. In 1860, the legislature put the question once again to a popular vote. On a vote in 1862, no city received the 50 percent minimum required by law. In an 1864 election, Salem received 79 percent and was declared the state capital. The Oregon Constitution lists the seat of state government in Article XIV as Marion County, of which Salem is the seat.

Question: In what year was there a runoff election between Salem and Eugene to decide which would be capital in the state that selected Oregon city as its first capital?
Answer: 1856