The Golden Heian Era: The geomancers in 794 decided that Heian-kyo (modern Kyoto) would be an auspicious site for the imperial family. It was indeeduntil 1869. Grants of tax-free land over the years had been made to Buddhist temples and members of the court aristocracy. The most powerful families thus carved out for themselves whole regions that were to become the fiefdoms of Japanese feudalism. By the end of the eighth century the clans had created a hierarchy of shiki, or rights, from the highest to the lowest ranks of society. The aristocrat or court patron lent his prestige to a powerful provincial proprietor, who employed a competent estate-manager to oversee smallholders, who in turn worked their farms with dependent laborers. This elaborate structure of interdependent rights and obligations was to serve Japanese society right into the 20th century. Meanwhile, Heian court life blossomed in an effusion of aesthetic expression. Princes and princesses judged the merits of birds, insects, flowers, roots, or seashells. Literary party games held in ornate palace gardens required each guest to compose a small poem as his wine cup floated toward him along a miniature winding channel of water. Expeditions were organized to the best viewing points for the first spring cherry blossoms, and special pavilions were built to watch the rising of the full moon. Every gesture, from the most banal opening of an umbrella to the sublimest act of lovemaking, had its appropriate ceremonial. Conversation often took the form of elegant exchanges of improvised verse. The changing role of Chinese culture in Japanese life was epitomized in the language itself. In the absence of an indigenous alphabet, Japanese scholars had with the greatest difficulty tried to adapt the complex ideograms of monosyllabic Chinese to the essentially polysyllabic Japanese. Thus developed the katakana system used as a vehicle for writing Buddhist names and concepts. After rival Fujiwara factions had been struggling for years to gain control of the imperial throne, they turned to the Taira and Minamoto armies in 1156 to wage the four-year war that heralded the end of the golden age of the Heian court. The Taira, controlling the region along the Inland Sea, defeated the Minamoto armies based in the Kanto province east of the capital.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer: What time period was Heian-kyo used as a site for the imperial family?

(CNN) -- Jo-Wilfried Tsonga ended Roger Federer's hopes of winning a record-equaling seventh Wimbledon title on Wednesday as the French 12th seed staged a stunning fightback to reach the semifinals. Federer appeared to be cruising into the last four after winning the first two sets, but Tsonga inflicted the Swiss world No. 3's first defeat from that vantage point in 179 grand slam matches. It was only the third time in the 29-year-old's glittering career that the 16-time grand slam champion had surrendered a two-set lead. Tsonga, ranked 19th in the world, triumphed 3-6 6-7 (3-7) 6-4 6-4 6-4 on Centre Court, serving out to love as he earned a clash with second seed Novak Djokovic. The Serbian, who beat Tsonga in the 2008 Australian Open final, ended the dream run of Australian 18-year-old Bernard Tomic. Tsonga defeated Federer for just the second time in six meetings, their first on grass. "It was amazing. I played unbelievable. It's never easy to come back against Roger. I'm so happy, it's crazy," the 26-year-old told reporters after reaching the semifinals at Wimbledon for the first time. "He's the biggest champion in the sport. He has achieved so much and is the best player in the world. To be two sets down and come back was unbelievable. I served really well. Against Djokovic I will have to come out and do the same again." Federer has now lost in the quarterfinals two years in a row, being beaten by eventual runner-up Tomas Berdych in 2010. "Jo played great. Really from start to finish I don't remember seeing a break point after I broke him in the first game," Federer said.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer: What two players beat Federer in the quarterfinals?

"The impact of her interest and work on the provision of legal services in the state of California is immeasurable," said Patricia Philips, senior of-counsel for Los Angeles' Morrison & Foerster. "Its value is felt every day by someone who would otherwise be floundering around in the legal system yet dealing with very serious problems." Zelon's public-interest work has not gone unnoticed. Several organizations that share her commitment to public service - including the National Legal Aid & Defender Association and the State Bar of California - have honored her. Two years ago, Zelon received the Laurie D. Zelon Pro Bono Award, which had been named for her one year earlier by the Law Firm Pro Bono Project, which she'd helped found. "I didn't find out until I was standing in the great hall of the Supreme Court, surrounded by 300 people who were there, that the award had been named for me and was thereafter going to be given in my name. It's very hard to believe, for anyone who knows me well, but I was actually speechless for a period," Zelon said. Zelon faced one of the greatest challenges of her legal career, she said, when her appointment to the bench forced her to switch gears from civil litigation to criminal law. "It was a steep learning curve for me," she said. "It's a whole different set of processes. The rules are different. The case law is a whole body unto itself." Attorneys praise Zelon for her thorough understanding of the law. "She's extremely well-versed in the law," Leon said. "She's very thorough in her research," Wong said. Of course, not all attorneys concur with every decision Zelon makes in court. Some city attorneys disagree with her interpretation of evidentiary statutes when Zelon puts limits on their use of hearsay testimony. But lawyers who have appeared before her say that they appreciate her intelligent interpretation of the law.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer:
Who raised Zelon for her thorough understanding of the law?