niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Passage: With the emergence of QB Tony Romo in their road victory over the Panthers, the Cowboys flew to FedExField for a rematch with the Washington Redskins.  In the first quarter, Dallas trailed early as Redskins MLB Lemar Marshall tackled RB Julius Jones in the endzone for a safety and kicker Nick Novak kicked a 28-yard field goal.  In the second quarter, the Cowboys started to fight back, as Romo completed a 10-yard TD pass to WR Terry Glenn (with a failed two-point conversion) and kicker Mike Vanderjagt kicked a 33-yard field goal.  The 'Skins would retaliate as RB Clinton Portis ran 38 yards for a touchdown, yet Vanderjagt would allow Dallas to tie at halftime on a 30-yard field goal.  In the third quarter, the Cowboys increased their lead with Romo completing a 4-yard TD pass to WR Terrell Owens, who would do a "sleeping celebration." afterwards.  He would get flagged for excessive celebration. The "sleeping celebration" referenced Owens' admission earlier in the week that he has trouble staying awake during team meetings. In the fourth quarter, Washington fought back with QB Mark Brunell completing an 18-yard TD pass to TE Chris Cooley.  Afterwards, the Redskins would block a 35-yard field goal try by Vanderjagt, which would get picked up by Sean Taylor and returned it 30 yards before getting tackled.  Even though time ran out, the Redskins would get one chance to win, due to a face mask infraction penalty on Guard Kyle Kosier.  Washington took advantage, as Novak kicked the game-winning 47-yard field goal to drop Dallas to 4-4. Stats.
Output: Who threw the shortest touchdown pass of the game?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: Across how many years was the Greek population forced to leave their ancestral homelands?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: Approximately how many people were uprooted from their homes as a result of the Treaty of Lausanne?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: How many days after the Turkish army's entry into Smyrna did a fire destroy the waterfront?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: How many days passed between the Turkish army entering Smyrna and the fire that engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: How many treaties were made?
Passage: By 9 September 1922, the Turkish army had entered Smyrna, with the Greek authorities having left two days before. Large scale disorder followed, with the Christian population suffering under attacks from soldiers and Turkish inhabitants. The Greek archbishop Chrysostomos had been lynched by a mob which included Turkish soldiers, and on September 13, a fire from the Armenian quarter of the city had engulfed the Christian waterfront of the city, leaving the city devastated. The responsibility for the fire is a controversial issue; some sources blame Turks, and some sources blame Greeks or Armenians. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Greeks and Armenians were killed in the fire and accompanying massacres. According to the population exchange treaty signed by both the Turkish and Greek governments, Greek orthodox citizens of Turkey and Turkish and Greek Muslim citizens residing in Greece were subjected to the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1,500,000 Orthodox Christians, being ethnic Greeks and ethnic Turks from Turkey and about 500,000 Turks and Greek Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands. M. Norman Naimark claimed that this treaty was the last part of an ethnic cleansing campaign to create an ethnically pure homeland for the Turks Historian Dinah Shelton similarly wrote that "the Lausanne Treaty completed the forcible transfer of the country's Greeks." A large part of the Greek population was forced to leave their ancestral homelands of Ionia, Pontus and Eastern Thrace between 1914-22. These refugees, as well as Greek Americans with origins in Anatolia, were not allowed to return to their homelands after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Output: What forced the Greeks to move?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many Civil wars broke out overall?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many people did Burgundy have tortured?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many war spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years after David of Burgundy had been appointed as bishop of Utrecht did he imprison Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years after the First Utrecht Civil War was it before the Second Utrecht Civil War broke out?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years apart was the First Utrecht Civil War and the Second Utrecht Civil War?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years before the Civil war had the Duke of Burgundy been appointed as bishop of Utrecht?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years before the First Utrecht Civil War was it before Davidof Burgundy was appointed as bishop of Utrecht?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years between the first and second war?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years did the First Utrecht Civil War last?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years long was the war?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years spanned from when the Civil war first started?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: How many years were between the end of the first civil war and when the Second Utrecht Civil War broke out?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: What event happened first, the civil war broke out or Duke of Burgundy had been appointed as bishop of Utrecht?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: What family supported Burgundy?
Passage: The First Utrecht Civil War  took place between 1470 and 1474 when the Hook and Cod wars spilled over into the Bishopric of Utrecht. David of Burgundy, illegitimate son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy had been  appointed as bishop of Utrecht in 1456 with support of the Cods. The Utrecht chapters, however, had elected the Hook-favoured provost Gijsbrecht van Brederode as bishop. But Philip the Good used force to make David's appointment be accepted. Nevertheless, opposition against his rule remained, and David of Burgundy even found it safer to leave the city of Utrecht and take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede. The van Brederode family was at the center of the opposition. In 1470, David of Burgundy imprisoned Gijsbrecht van Brederode and his brother Reinoud II van Brederode, and had them tortured. This action stirred up the century old animosity between the Hooks who supported the family van Brederode and the Cods who supported Burgundy. A civil war broke out that lasted until 1474.The status-quo returned, until a Second Utrecht Civil War broke out in 1481.
Output: Why did he  take up residence in Wijk bij Duurstede?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many countries participated in the invasion of Cambodia?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many kings are mentioned in the passage?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many leaders did the Spanish expedition into Cambodia have?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many months after Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese did 100,000 Thai soldiers invade Cambodia?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many people succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many private individuals slaughtered the Spaniards and Portuguese?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many reasons did the Spanish empire have to attempt a war on the Cambodians?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many things did the Spanish Empire want by conquering Cambodia?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many years Machuca and Gonzales entered Cambodia until Cambodia came under the dominance of Thai?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many years after Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia did Cambodia came under the dominance of the Tha?
Passage: The Cambodian-Spanish War    was an attempt by the Spanish Empire to conquer Cambodia, establish their own king, and Christianize the population. Along with the Spanish, the Japanese, Filipinos, Thai, Portuguese, and Dominicans participated in the invasion of Cambodia. Each country possessed different motives for their invasion of Cambodia. Specifically, the Thai interference and the Spanish expedition was a result of a power struggle between rival factions in Cambodia's government. In addition, both Spanish and Portuguese took part in the invasion of Cambodia because King Philip II ruled both Spain and Portugal. In February 1593, Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia in order to fight the Burmese. Later on, in May 1593, 100,000 Thai  soldiers invaded Cambodia. As a result of the Thai's invasion, Lovek was conquered in July 1594. In 1593, the Spanish expedition led by Gregorio Vargas Machuca and Blas Ruiz de Hernan Gonzales entered Cambodia through the city of Manila.Although the Spanish invasion of Cambodia  failed, Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II in May 1597. Private individuals of Muslim Malays, Chams, Cambodians retaliated to Spain and Portugal's invasion by slaughtering the Spanish and Portuguese, including Diogo Veloso. Only a few Filipinos and one Spaniard survived the massacre. Because of the massacre, Spain's planned Christianization of Cambodia failed. After the attack, Cambodia came under the dominance of the Thai in July 1599.
Output: How many years after Thai ruler Naresuen attacked Cambodia did Ruiz and Veloso succeeded in establishing king Barom Reachea II?