niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Passage: Bayinnaung now looked to Siam, which successfully fought off the first Burmese invasion in 1547-1549. However, Bayinnaung now had a far larger empire at his disposal. Knowing that Siam be much more difficult than Shan states and Lan Na campaigns, Bayinnaung assembled the largest army yet—60,000 men, 2400 horses and 360 elephants, two and a half times larger than his previous high. The army would have been larger but the ruler of Chiang Mai, Mekuti, did not send in his share of the levy. Four Burmese armies invaded northern Siam in November 1563, and had overcome Siamese stands at Kamphaeng Phet, Sukhothai and Phitsanulok by January 1564. Armies then came down on Ayutthaya but were kept at bay for days by Portuguese warships and batteries at the harbour. Siamese defences collapsed after the Burmese captured the Portuguese ships on 7 February 1564 . King Maha Chakkraphat of Siam surrendered on 18 February 1564 . The king and crown prince Ramesuan were brought back to Pegu as hostages. Bayinnaung left Mahinthrathirat, one of Maha Chakkraphat's sons as vassal king, along with a garrison of 3,000 men.
Output: What stands was overcome by the Burmese armies?
Passage: Bayinnaung now looked to Siam, which successfully fought off the first Burmese invasion in 1547-1549. However, Bayinnaung now had a far larger empire at his disposal. Knowing that Siam be much more difficult than Shan states and Lan Na campaigns, Bayinnaung assembled the largest army yet—60,000 men, 2400 horses and 360 elephants, two and a half times larger than his previous high. The army would have been larger but the ruler of Chiang Mai, Mekuti, did not send in his share of the levy. Four Burmese armies invaded northern Siam in November 1563, and had overcome Siamese stands at Kamphaeng Phet, Sukhothai and Phitsanulok by January 1564. Armies then came down on Ayutthaya but were kept at bay for days by Portuguese warships and batteries at the harbour. Siamese defences collapsed after the Burmese captured the Portuguese ships on 7 February 1564 . King Maha Chakkraphat of Siam surrendered on 18 February 1564 . The king and crown prince Ramesuan were brought back to Pegu as hostages. Bayinnaung left Mahinthrathirat, one of Maha Chakkraphat's sons as vassal king, along with a garrison of 3,000 men.
Output: Who was Maha Chakkraphat's son?
Passage: Bayinnaung now looked to Siam, which successfully fought off the first Burmese invasion in 1547-1549. However, Bayinnaung now had a far larger empire at his disposal. Knowing that Siam be much more difficult than Shan states and Lan Na campaigns, Bayinnaung assembled the largest army yet—60,000 men, 2400 horses and 360 elephants, two and a half times larger than his previous high. The army would have been larger but the ruler of Chiang Mai, Mekuti, did not send in his share of the levy. Four Burmese armies invaded northern Siam in November 1563, and had overcome Siamese stands at Kamphaeng Phet, Sukhothai and Phitsanulok by January 1564. Armies then came down on Ayutthaya but were kept at bay for days by Portuguese warships and batteries at the harbour. Siamese defences collapsed after the Burmese captured the Portuguese ships on 7 February 1564 . King Maha Chakkraphat of Siam surrendered on 18 February 1564 . The king and crown prince Ramesuan were brought back to Pegu as hostages. Bayinnaung left Mahinthrathirat, one of Maha Chakkraphat's sons as vassal king, along with a garrison of 3,000 men.
Output: Who was Mahinthrathirat's father?
Passage: Bayinnaung now looked to Siam, which successfully fought off the first Burmese invasion in 1547-1549. However, Bayinnaung now had a far larger empire at his disposal. Knowing that Siam be much more difficult than Shan states and Lan Na campaigns, Bayinnaung assembled the largest army yet—60,000 men, 2400 horses and 360 elephants, two and a half times larger than his previous high. The army would have been larger but the ruler of Chiang Mai, Mekuti, did not send in his share of the levy. Four Burmese armies invaded northern Siam in November 1563, and had overcome Siamese stands at Kamphaeng Phet, Sukhothai and Phitsanulok by January 1564. Armies then came down on Ayutthaya but were kept at bay for days by Portuguese warships and batteries at the harbour. Siamese defences collapsed after the Burmese captured the Portuguese ships on 7 February 1564 . King Maha Chakkraphat of Siam surrendered on 18 February 1564 . The king and crown prince Ramesuan were brought back to Pegu as hostages. Bayinnaung left Mahinthrathirat, one of Maha Chakkraphat's sons as vassal king, along with a garrison of 3,000 men.
Output: Who was the leader of Siam?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: At least how many more men were in the Burmese army thanthe Mongol army?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: How many animals of horses and elephants did the Burmese army have according to the Yuan Chronicle?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: How many more horses were there than elephants?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: How many more men did the 40,000 Burmese army have compared to the Mongal's army according to the Yuan Chronicle?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: How many more men did the Burmese army have compared to the Mongol army (low figure)?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: How many of the 700 Mongol men survived according to the Yuan Chronicle?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: What animals were the Burmese army on?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: What caused the Turkish and Mongol horsemen to flee?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: What document said that a Burmese army invaded Gold Teeth?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: Which account said the Burmese had more elephants, the Yuan Chronicle  or Marco Polo?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: Which animals did the Burmese army have more of, horses or elephants?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: Which group of animals were there more of during battle, horses or elephants?
Passage: According to the Yuan dynasty chronicle and Marco Polo's accounts, a Burmese army "invaded" the Mongol territory of Gold Teeth, and was defeated by the Mongol army in April 1277. The battle took place either at the Vochang valley  or 110 km southwest at Kanngai , which the Burmese called Ngasaunggyan. The Yuan Chronicle reports that only 700 men defeated a Burmese army of 40,000 to 50,000 with 10,000 horses and 800 elephants. It also reports only one Mongol was killed, in trying to catch an elephant. According to Marco Polo, the Mongol army consisted of 12,000 mounted archers, and the Burmese army numbered 60,000 men with 2000 elephants, "on each of which was set a tower of timber, well-framed and strong, and carrying from 12 to 16 well-armed fighting men." Even then, the 40,000 to 60,000 figures of the Burmese army strength were likely eye estimates and may still be too high; the Mongols may have erred "on the side of generosity" not to "diminish their glory in defeating superior numbers." According to Marco Polo's account, in the early stages of the battle, the Turkish and Mongol horsemen "took such fright at the sight of the elephants that they would not be got to face the foe, but always swerved and turned back," while the Burmese forces pressed on. But the Mongol commander Huthukh did not panic; he ordered his troops to dismount, and from the cover of the nearby treeline, aim their bows directly at the advancing elephants. The Mongol archers' arrows threw the animals into such pain that they fled.
Output: Who did the elephants scare?
Passage: Still looking for their first road win of 2006 and trying to break a now five-game losing streak, the Lions went to Wisconsin to take on the Green Bay Packers. After the teams traded first-quarter field goals, the Packers took a 10-3 halftime lead thanks to a 14-yard TD run by Vernand Morency. Detroit closed to within a point with two more Jason Hanson field goals, but the Packers settled matters with another touchdown run by Morency, this one from 21 yards out with less than three minutes remaining. Packers quarterback Brett Favre broke Dan Marino's career completions record during the contest, but also threw three interceptions. The Lions fell to 2-12 on the season, 0-7 away from Ford Field.
Output: How many points lead did the Packers have at halftime?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after Harald Hardrada became King of Norway did he die in a faield invasion of England?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after King Olaf II died did Harald Hardrada die?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after King Olaf II of Norway was killed was he made a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after King Olaf II's death was he declared a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after Olaf II was killed was he declared a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after Olaf II's death was he declared a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after Olaf was killed did Adam of Bremen write that he was killed in an ambush?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after the Batte of Stiklestad did the Battle of Stamford Bridge take place?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after the Battle of Stiklestad did the Battle of Stamford Bridge occur?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years after the Battle of Stiklestad where King Olaf II of Norway was killed did Pope Alexander III declare Olaf a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years had Harald Hardrada been king before his death?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years old was Harald Hardrada when he became King of Norway?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years old was Harald Hardrada when he died?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years old was Harald when he was crowned King of Norway?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years passed between the Battle of Stiklestad and the crowning of Harald Hardrada as the King of Norway?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years passed between the death of King Olaf II and when he was declared a saint?
Passage: The Battle of Stiklestad  in 1030 is one of the most famous battles in the history of Norway. In this battle, King Olaf II of Norway  was killed. During the pontificate of Pope Alexander III, the Roman Catholic Church  declared Olaf a saint in 1164. His younger half-brother, Harald Hardrada, was also present at the battle. Harald was only fifteen when the battle of Stiklestad took place. He became King of Norway in 1047, only to die in a failed invasion of England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. The authenticity of the battle as a historical event is subject to question. Contemporary sources say the king was murdered. According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle of 1030, Olaf was killed by his own people. Adam of Bremen wrote in 1070 that Olaf was killed in an ambush, and so did Florence of Worcester in 1100. Those are the only contemporary sources that mention the death of the king. After the king's canonization it was felt that the saint could not have died in such circumstances.  The story of the Battle of Stiklestad as we know it gradually developed during the two centuries following the death of King Olaf. Saint Olaf must have fallen in a major battle for Christianity.
Output: How many years was Harald Hardrada the King of Norway prior to his death?