romikgosai/squad_modified_2 huggingface dataset:
About that time the "executionist movement" (Polish: "egzekucja praw"--"execution of the laws") began to take form. Its members would seek to curb the power of the magnates at the Sejm and to strengthen the power of king and country. In 1562 at the Sejm in Piotrków they would force the magnates to return many leased crown lands to the king, and the king to create a standing army (wojsko kwarciane). One of the most famous members of this movement was Jan Zamoyski. After his death in 1605, the movement lost its political force.

Q1: What was the movement called also known as execution of laws?
A1: "executionist movement
Q2: What were the intentions of executionists movement?
A2: seek to curb the power of the magnates at the Sejm and to strengthen the power of king and country
Q3: what did the Sejm in Piotrków forced the magnates to do?
A3: return many leased crown lands to the king,
Q4: WHen did Jan Zamoyski. die?
A4: 1605
Q5: What happened when Jan Zamoyski died?
A5: movement lost its political force.
Until the death of Sigismund II Augustus, the last king of the Jagiellonian dynasty, monarchs could be elected from within only the royal family. However, starting from 1573, practically any Polish noble or foreigner of royal blood could become a Polish–Lithuanian monarch. Every newly elected king was supposed to sign two documents—the Pacta conventa ("agreed pacts")—a confirmation of the king's pre-election promises, and Henrican articles (artykuły henrykowskie, named after the first freely elected king, Henry of Valois). The latter document served as a virtual Polish constitution and contained the basic laws of the Commonwealth:

Q1: Who was the last king of the Jagiellonian dynasty?
A1: Sigismund II Augustus
Q2: What stopped after the death of Sigismund II Augustus?
A2: monarchs could be elected from within only the royal family
Q3: After 1573 who could become a polish-lithuanian monarch?
A3: any Polish noble or foreigner of royal blood
Q4: How many documents should the new elected king sign?
A4: two documents
Q5: What was contained in the Henrican articles and the Pacta conventa?
A5: basic laws of the Commonwealth
In 1578 king Stefan Batory created the Crown Tribunal in order to reduce the enormous pressure on the Royal Court. This placed much of the monarch's juridical power in the hands of the elected szlachta deputies, further strengthening the nobility class. In 1581 the Crown Tribunal was joined by a counterpart in Lithuania, the Lithuanian Tribunal.

Q1: The crown tribunal was created when?
A1: 1578
Q2: Who created the crown tribunal?
A2: king Stefan Batory
Q3: What was the crown tribunal supposed to do?
A3: reduce the enormous pressure on the Royal Court
Q4: Where was a lot of power placed in result of the crown tribunal?
A4: the nobility class
Q5: WHo joined the crown tribunal eventually?
A5: Lithuanian Tribunal
For many centuries, wealthy and powerful members of the szlachta sought to gain legal privileges over their peers. Few szlachta were wealthy enough to be known as magnates (karmazyni—the "Crimsons", from the crimson colour of their boots). A proper magnate should be able to trace noble ancestors back for many generations and own at least 20 villages or estates. He should also hold a major office in the Commonwealth.

Q1: What did powerful leaders of szlachta sought?
A1: gain legal privileges over their peers
Q2: What were most szlachtas class?
A2: Few szlachta were wealthy enough to be known as magnates
Q3: What is another name for magnates?
A3: Crimsons
Q4: A proper magnates own what?
A4: own at least 20 villages or estates.
Q5: Who is properly in the major office in the commonwealth?
A5: magnates
Some historians estimate the number of magnates as 1% of the number of szlachta. Out of approx. one million szlachta, tens of thousands of families, only 200–300 persons could be classed as great magnates with country-wide possessions and influence, and 30–40 of them could be viewed as those with significant impact on Poland's politics.

Q1: Historians estimate how much of magnates make up szlachta?
A1: 1%
Q2: Out of one million szlachtas how many were magnates?
A2: 200–300
Q3: Out of one million how many people could be viewed with significant impact politically?
A3: 30–40
Magnates often received gifts from monarchs, which significantly increased their wealth. Often, those gifts were only temporary leases, which the magnates never returned (in the 16th century, the anti-magnate opposition among szlachta was known as the ruch egzekucji praw—movement for execution of the laws—which demanded that all such possessions are returned to their proper owner, the king).

Q1: Magnates recieved gifts often from who?
A1: monarchs
Q2: What significantly increased the magnates wealth?
A2: Magnates
Q3: What terms were these gifts given?
A3: temporary leases
Q4: What did the magnates do eventually with the gifts?
A4: never returned
One of the most important victories of the magnates was the late 16th century right to create ordynacja's (similar to majorats), which ensured that a family which gained wealth and power could more easily preserve this. Ordynacje's of families of Radziwiłł, Zamoyski, Potocki or Lubomirski often rivalled the estates of the king and were important power bases for the magnates.

Q1: The right to create ordynacja's was important to what group?
A1: magnates
Q2: When did the right to create ordynacja's happen?
A2: late 16th century
Q3: What did the right to create ordynacja's entail?
A3: ensured that a family which gained wealth and power could more easily preserve this
Q4: What did the powerful families do with the kings estates?
A4: often rivalled
Q5: What was an important power basis for the magnates?
A5: estates of the king
The sovereignty of szlachta was ended in 1795 by Partitions of Poland, and until 1918 their legal status was dependent on policies of the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Prussia or the Habsburg Monarchy.

Q1: When did the sovereignty of szlachta end?
A1: 1795
Q2: Who ended the sovereignty of szlachta?
A2: Partitions of Poland
Q3: UNtil 1918 whos legal status was dependent on the russian empiresovereignty of szlachta?
A3: szlachta
In the 1840s Nicholas I reduced 64,000 szlachta to commoner status. Despite this, 62.8% of Russia's nobles were szlachta in 1858 and still 46.1% in 1897. Serfdom was abolished in Russian Poland on February 19, 1864. It was deliberately enacted in a way that would ruin the szlachta. It was the only area where peasants paid the market price in redemption for the land (the average for the empire was 34% above the market price). All land taken from Polish peasants since 1846 was to be returned without redemption payments. The ex serfs could only sell land to other peasants, not szlachta. 90% of the ex serfs in the empire who actually gained land after 1861 were in the 8 western provinces. Along with Romania, Polish landless or domestic serfs were the only ones to be given land after serfdom was abolished. All this was to punish the szlachta's role in the uprisings of 1830 and 1863. By 1864 80% of szlachta were déclassé, 1/4 petty nobles were worse off than the average serf, 48.9% of land in Russian Poland was in peasant hands, nobles still held 46%. In Second Polish Republic the privileges of the nobility were lawfully abolished by the March Constitution in 1921 and as such not granted by any future Polish law.

Q1: Who redused 64,000 szlachta to commoner status?
A1: Nicholas I
Q2: IN 1858 who was szlachta out of all the russian nobles?
A2: 62.8%
Q3: When and who abolished the serfdom?
A3: Russian Poland on February 19, 1864
Q4: Who could the ex serfs sell their land to?
A4: only sell land to other peasants, not szlachta
Q5: How much land was held by the peasants?
A5: 48.9%
The Polish nobility differed in many respects from the nobility of other countries. The most important difference was that, while in most European countries the nobility lost power as the ruler strove for absolute monarchy, in Poland the reverse process occurred: the nobility actually gained power at the expense of the king, and the political system evolved into an oligarchy.

Q1: What was different between the polish nobility and others?
A1: European countries the nobility lost power as the ruler strove for absolute monarchy
Q2: What happened to nobility at expense of the king?
A2: actually gained power
Q3: What did the political system eventually evolve into?
A3: oligarchy
Q4: What did the ruler strive for?
A4: absolute monarchy
Poland's nobility were also more numerous than those of all other European countries, constituting some 10–12% of the total population of historic Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth also some 10–12% among ethnic Poles on ethnic Polish lands (part of Commonwealth), but up to 25% of all Poles worldwide (szlachta could dispose more of resources to travels and/or conquering), while in some poorer regions (e.g., Mazowsze, the area centred on Warsaw) nearly 30%. However, according to  szlachta comprised around 8% of the total population in 1791 (up from 6.6% in the 16th century), and no more than 16% of the Roman Catholic (mostly ethnically Polish) population. It should be noted, though, that Polish szlachta usually incorporated most local nobility from the areas that were absorbed by Poland–Lithuania (Ruthenian boyars, Livonian nobles, etc.) By contrast, the nobilities of other European countries, except for Spain, amounted to a mere 1–3%, however the era of sovereign rules of Polish nobility ended earlier than in other countries (excluding France) yet in 1795 (see: Partitions of Poland), since then their legitimation and future fate depended on legislature and procedures of Russian Empire, Kingdom of Prussia or Habsburg Monarchy. Gradually their privileges were under further limitations to be completely dissolved by March Constitution of Poland in 1921.

Q1: How much of the total population was polish common wealth?
A1: 10–12%
Q2: IN 1791 how much did the szalchta comprimise the total population?
A2: 8%
Q3: Polish szlachta usually incorporated who?
A3: most local nobility from the areas that were absorbed by Poland–Lithuania
Q4: How many nobilities made up other European countries besides poland lithuania?
A4: 1–3%
Q5: What dissolved the priveleges of Russian Empire, Kingdom of Prussia or Habsburg Monarchy?
A5: March Constitution of Poland
There were a number of avenues to upward social mobility and the achievement of nobility. Poland's nobility was not a rigidly exclusive, closed class. Many low-born individuals, including townsfolk, peasants and Jews, could and did rise to official ennoblement in Polish society. Each szlachcic had enormous influence over the country's politics, in some ways even greater than that enjoyed by the citizens of modern democratic countries. Between 1652 and 1791, any nobleman could nullify all the proceedings of a given sejm (Commonwealth parliament) or sejmik (Commonwealth local parliament) by exercising his individual right of liberum veto (Latin for "I do not allow"), except in the case of a confederated sejm or confederated sejmik.

Q1: What class was polands nobility?
A1: closed class
Q2: Who could rise into polish ennoblement?
A2: Many low-born individuals
Q3: How much influence did each szlachcic have over politics?
A3: enormous influence
Q4: WHo could nullify all the proceedings of a given sejm?
A4: any nobleman
Q5: What is is called to nullify proceedings?
A5: liberum veto
All children of the Polish nobility inherited their noble status from a noble mother and father. Any individual could attain ennoblement (nobilitacja) for special services to the state. A foreign noble might be naturalised as a Polish noble (Polish: "indygenat") by the Polish king (later, from 1641, only by a general sejm).

Q1: Children inherited polish nobility from whom?
A1: noble mother and father
Q2: What does an individual do to attain ennoblement?
A2: special services to the state
Q3: WHo could naturalize a polish noble?
A3: Polish king
Q4: What is another name for ennoblement?
A4: nobilitacja
Q5: WHat is another name for polish noble?
A5: indygenat
In theory at least, all Polish noblemen were social equals. Also in theory, they were legal peers. Those who held 'real power' dignities were more privileged but these dignities were not hereditary. Those who held honorary dignities were higher in 'ritual' hierarchy but these dignities were also granted for a lifetime. Some tenancies became hereditary and went with both privilege and titles. Nobles who were not direct barons of the Crown but held land from other lords were only peers "de iure".

Q1: In theory how were all polish noblemen viewed?
A1: equals
Q2: Was was unique about the dignities?
A2: not hereditary
Q3: If one is high in dignities they are also high in what other form?
A3: ritual
Q4: Nobles held land form whom?
A4: other lords were only peers "de iure"
Note that the Polish landed gentry (ziemianie or ziemiaństwo) was composed of any nobility that owned lands: thus of course the magnates, the middle nobility and that lesser nobility that had at least part of the village. As manorial lordships were also opened to burgesses of certain privileged royal cities, not all landed gentry had a hereditary title of nobility.

Q1: Who could compose the polish landed gentry?
A1: any nobility that owned lands
Q2: whats is another name for polish landed gentry?
A2: (ziemianie or ziemiaństwo
Q3: Did all hold title of nobility?
A3: no
Coats of arms were very important to the Polish nobility. Its heraldic system evolved together with its neighbours in Central Europe, while differing in many ways from the heraldry of other European countries. Polish knighthood families had its counterparts, links or roots in Moravia (i.e. Poraj) and Germany (i.e. Junosza).

Q1: What was very important to the polish nobility?
A1: Coats of arms
Q2: What kind of system was the coats of arms?
A2: heraldic system
Q3: how did the polish nobility system compare to other heraldy countries?
A3: differing in many ways
Q4: Where did polish knightshood originate?
A4: Moravia (i.e. Poraj) and Germany
The most notable difference is that, contrary to other European heraldic systems, the Jews, Muslim Tatars or another minorities would be given the noble title. Also, most families sharing origin would also share a coat-of-arms. They would also share arms with families adopted into the clan (these would often have their arms officially altered upon ennoblement). Sometimes unrelated families would be falsely attributed to the clan on the basis of similarity of arms. Also often noble families claimed inaccurate clan membership. Logically, the number of coats of arms in this system was rather low and did not exceed 200 in late Middle Ages (40,000 in the late 18th century).

Q1: What is the most notable difference between countries?
A1: minorities would be given the noble title
Q2: Coat of arms would be shared with who else?
A2: most families sharing origin
Q3: How would unrelated families be attributed to the clan?
A3: on the basis of similarity of arms
Q4: Did number of cat of arms in the late middle ages fall?
A4: low and did not exceed 200
Also, the tradition of differentiating between the coat of arms proper and a lozenge granted to women did not develop in Poland. Usually men inherited the coat of arms from their fathers. Also, the brisure was rarely used.

Q1: What was rarely used?
A1: brisure
Q2: Where did the  coat of arms proper and a lozenge granted to women not develoupe?
A2: Poland
Q3: Where did men get their coat of arms usually?
A3: their fathers
The szlachta's prevalent mentality and ideology were manifested in "Sarmatism", a name derived from a myth of the szlachta's origin in the powerful ancient nation of Sarmatians. This belief system became an important part of szlachta culture and affected all aspects of their lives. It was popularized by poets who exalted traditional village life, peace and pacifism. It was also manifested in oriental-style apparel (the żupan, kontusz, sukmana, pas kontuszowy, delia); and made the scimitar-like szabla, too, a near-obligatory item of everyday szlachta apparel. Sarmatism served to integrate the multi-ethnic nobility as it created an almost nationalistic sense of unity and pride in the szlachta's "Golden Liberty" (złota wolność). Knowledge of Latin was widespread, and most szlachta freely mixed Polish and Latin vocabulary (the latter, "macaronisms"—from "macaroni") in everyday conversation.

Q1: What was the prevalent mentality and ideology called?
A1: Sarmatism
Q2: Where did the name sarmatism originate?
A2: powerful ancient nation of Sarmatians
Q3: How did sarmatism effect szlachta culture?
A3: served to integrate the multi-ethnic nobility
Q4: What was also pushed for by result of sarmatism?
A4: peace and pacifism
Q5: What languages were freely mixed?
A5: Polish and Latin
Prior to the Reformation, the Polish nobility were mostly either Roman Catholic or Orthodox with a small group of Muslims. Many families, however, soon adopted the Reformed faiths. After the Counter-Reformation, when the Roman Catholic Church regained power in Poland, the nobility became almost exclusively Catholic, despite the fact that Roman Catholicism was not the majority religion in Commonwealth (the Catholic and Orthodox churches each accounted for some 40% of all citizens population, with the remaining 20% being Jews or members of Protestant denominations). In the 18th century, many followers of Jacob Frank joined the ranks of Jewish-descended Polish gentry. Although Jewish religion wasn't usually a pretext to block or deprive of noble status, some laws favoured religious conversion from Judaism to Christianity (see: Neophyte) by rewarding it with ennoblement.

Q1: What two religions were most common?
A1: Roman Catholic or Orthodox
Q2: What was the minority group in the polish nobility?
A2: Muslims
Q3: What was rewarding for switching judiasm to christianity?
A3: ennoblement
Q4: What happened after the roman catholic church regained power in Poland?
A4: the nobility became almost exclusively Catholic
Q5: What was the smallest amount of religion in the noble?
A5: Jews
Publius Vergilius Maro (Classical Latin: [ˈpuː.blɪ.ʊs wɛrˈɡɪ.lɪ.ʊs ˈma.roː]; October 15, 70 BC – September 21, 19 BC), usually called Virgil or Vergil /ˈvɜːrdʒᵻl/ in English, was an ancient Roman poet of the Augustan period. He is known for three major works of Latin literature, the Eclogues (or Bucolics), the Georgics, and the epic Aeneid. A number of minor poems, collected in the Appendix Vergiliana, are sometimes attributed to him.

Q1: During which period was Vigil a poet?
A1: Augustan
Q2: How many major works of literature is Virgil known for?
A2: three
Q3: Which major Latin epic is Virgil known for?
A3: Aeneid
Q4: What is Virgil's full name?
A4: Publius Vergilius Maro
Q5: Which collection of minor poems are sometimes attributed to Virgil?
A5: Appendix Vergiliana
Virgil is traditionally ranked as one of Rome's greatest poets. His Aeneid has been considered the national epic of ancient Rome from the time of its composition to the present day. Modeled after Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, the Aeneid follows the Trojan refugee Aeneas as he struggles to fulfill his destiny and arrive on the shores of Italy—in Roman mythology the founding act of Rome. Virgil's work has had wide and deep influence on Western literature, most notably Dante's Divine Comedy, in which Virgil appears as Dante's guide through hell and purgatory.

Q1: Which of Virgil's works is considered the national epic of ancient Rome?
A1: Aeneid
Q2: Which works did Virgil model the Aeneid after?
A2: Iliad and Odyssey
Q3: Who is the main character in the Aeneid?
A3: Aeneas
Q4: What was Aeneas trying to accomplish in the Aeneid?
A4: fulfill his destiny and arrive on the shores of Italy
Q5: Who appears as Dante's guide through hell and purgatory in the Divine Comedy?
A5: Virgil
Virgil's biographical tradition is thought to depend on a lost biography by Varius, Virgil's editor, which was incorporated into the biography by Suetonius and the commentaries of Servius and Donatus, the two great commentators on Virgil's poetry. Although the commentaries no doubt record much factual information about Virgil, some of their evidence can be shown to rely on inferences made from his poetry and allegorizing; thus, Virgil's biographical tradition remains problematic.

Q1: Who was Virgil's editor?
A1: Varius
Q2: Whose two commentaries were incorporated into Virgil's biography by Suetonius?
A2: Servius and Donatus
Q3: What do the comentaries rely on for some of their information about Virgil?
A3: inferences made from his poetry and allegorizing
Q4: Is Virgil's biographical tradition easily researched or is it problematic?
A4: problematic
The tradition holds that Virgil was born in the village of Andes, near Mantua in Cisalpine Gaul. Analysis of his name has led to beliefs that he descended from earlier Roman colonists. Modern speculation ultimately is not supported by narrative evidence either from his own writings or his later biographers. Macrobius says that Virgil's father was of a humble background; however, scholars generally believe that Virgil was from an equestrian landowning family which could afford to give him an education. He attended schools in Cremona, Mediolanum, Rome and Naples. After considering briefly a career in rhetoric and law, the young Virgil turned his talents to poetry.

Q1: In which village does tradition believe Virgil was born?
A1: Andes
Q2: In which cities did Virgil attend schools?
A2: Cremona, Mediolanum, Rome and Naples
Q3: What other career did Virgil consider?
A3: rhetoric and law
Q4: Which type of family do scholars generally believe Virgil belonged to?
A4: equestrian landowning
Q5: Does Macrobius believe Virgil's father came from a distinguished or humble background?
A5: humble
According to the commentators, Virgil received his first education when he was five years old and he later went to Cremona, Milan, and finally Rome to study rhetoric, medicine, and astronomy, which he soon abandoned for philosophy. From Virgil's admiring references to the neoteric writers Pollio and Cinna, it has been inferred that he was, for a time, associated with Catullus' neoteric circle. However schoolmates considered Virgil extremely shy and reserved, according to Servius, and he was nicknamed "Parthenias" or "maiden" because of his social aloofness. Virgil seems to have suffered bad health throughout his life and in some ways lived the life of an invalid. According to the Catalepton, while in the Epicurean school of Siro the Epicurean at Naples, he began to write poetry. A group of small works attributed to the youthful Virgil by the commentators survive collected under the title Appendix Vergiliana, but are largely considered spurious by scholars. One, the Catalepton, consists of fourteen short poems, some of which may be Virgil's, and another, a short narrative poem titled the Culex ("The Gnat"), was attributed to Virgil as early as the 1st century AD.

Q1: Which three studies did Virgil abandon for philosophy?
A1: rhetoric, medicine, and astronomy
Q2: How was Virgil regarded socially by his schoolmates?
A2: extremely shy and reserved
Q3: What was Virgil's nickname?
A3: Parthenias
Q4: How did Virgil earn his nickname "Parthenias" or "maiden"?
A4: social aloofness
Q5: Which short narrative poem was attributed to Virgil as early as the 1st century AD?
A5: the Culex