Malay Annals

The Malay Annals titled Sulalatus Salatin, is a literary work that gives a romanticised history of the origin and demise of the great Malay maritime empire, the Malacca Sultanate. The work, composed sometime between 15th and 16th centuries, is considered one of the finest literary and historical works in the Malay language; the original text has undergone numerous changes, with the oldest known version dated May 1612, through the rewriting effort commissioned by the regent of Johor, Yang di-Pertuan Di Hilir Raja Abdullah. It was written in the Classical Malay on traditional paper in old Jawi script, but today exists in 32 different manuscripts, including those in Rumi script. Notwithstanding some of its mystical contents, historians have looked at the text as a primary source of information on past events verifiable by other historical sources, in the Malay world. In 2001, the Malay Annals was listed on UNESCO's Memory of the World Programme International Register; the number of manuscripts of the Malay Annals and its related texts is large.

The manuscripts are found scattered over libraries in various countries: in Indonesia, in the United Kingdom, in the Netherlands and in Malaysia. Not all of these manuscripts have the same value. A version of the Annals dated 1612, acquired by Sir Stamford Raffles and coded Raffles MS no.18 or Raffles Manuscript 18, is considered the oldest and most faithful to the original. There is a possibility that Raffles MS no.18 version has developed from a genealogical king-list complete with the periods of reigns and dates. This king-list subsequently enlarged by various stories and relevant material, inserted into it in suitable places, but at the same time it lost its dates. Unknown Malay texts titled Soelalet Essalatina or Sulalatu'l-Salatina, that referred by Petrus Van der Vorm and François Valentijn in their works Collectanea Malaica Vocabularia and Oud En New Oost Indien could have existed in the form of a king-list. However, the introduction of Raffles MS no.18 describes that the manuscript originates from another manuscript known as Hikayat Melayu, which may trace its origin to the time of Melaka Sultanate.

The manuscript was brought together when the last ruler, Mahmud Shah, fled the Portuguese invasion in 1511 to Kampar. In 1536, during the Portuguese attack on Johor Lama, where the exiled sultan established his base, the manuscript was seized by the Portuguese soldiers and brought to Goa, Portuguese India. Decades in the early 17th century, the manuscript was returned to Johor from Goa by a nobleman identified as Orang Kaya Sogoh. However, historian Abdul Samad Ahmad provides an alternative view, suggesting that the manuscript was returned from Gowa, Sulawesi instead of Goa, India, his argument is based on the fact that during Melaka's era as an important regional entreport, it had established a strong trading and diplomatic ties with regional kingdoms, including Gowa, some copies of Hikayat Melayu could have been spread to Sulawesi long before the arrival of Portuguese. Another view, from William Linehan, tried to argue that Goa ought to read guha or gua, that the reference was to Gua, a place located north of Kuala Lipis in Pahang, where a copy of the Annals had been preserved and brought to Johor and edited there in 1612.

On Sunday, 12th Rabi' al-awwal 1021 AH, during the reign of Alauddin Riayat Shah III in Pekan Tua, the regent of Johor, Yang di-Pertuan Di Hilir Raja Abdullah known as Raja Bongsu, had commissioned the rewriting and compilation work of the manuscript to the Bendahara Tun Sri Lanang. A year in 1613, the Johor capital of Batu Sawar was sacked by the Acehnese invaders and Alauddin Riayat Shah, his entire court, including Tun Sri Lanang and Raja Abdullah was captured and exiled to Aceh. Although Tun Sri Lanang manage to worked a bulk of the Annals in Johor, he completed the work during his captivity in Aceh. In 1821, the English translation of Raffles MS no.. It was followed by the edited version in Malay language by Abdullah bin Abdul Kadir, published in Singapore in 1831 and the compilation by Édouard Dulaurier in 1849. In 1915, William Shellabear's edition was published, it is considered as a hybrid long text based on Abdullah and Dulaurier's version but containing extracts from other texts as well.

It was followed by another translation of Raffles MS no.18, this time by Richard Olaf Winstedt in 1938. Another important version, compiled by Malaysian historian Abdul Samad Ahmad in 1979, uses the original title of the text, Sulalatus Salatin. Abdul Samad's compilation was based on three manuscripts that he named as A, B and C, kept in the library of Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Kuala Lumpur. Two of the manuscripts, alternatively named as MS86 and MS86a by Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, were referred in the nomination form submitted for UNESCO's Memory of the World Programme International Register; the Malay Annals is a historical literature written in the form of narrative-prose with its main theme was to laud the greatness and superiority of Melaka. The narration, while relating the story of the reign of the sultans of Melaka until the demise of the sultanate to the Portuguese in 1511 and beyond, deals with a core issue of Malay statehood and historiography, the relationship between rulers and ruled.

The Annals are prefaced by a

Ark Encounter

Ark Encounter is a Christian religious and creationist theme park that opened in Grant County, Kentucky in 2016. The centerpiece of the park is a large representation of Noah's Ark based on the Genesis flood narrative contained in the Bible, it is 510 feet long, 85 feet wide, 51 feet high. Ark Encounter is operated by Answers in Genesis, a young Earth creationist organization that operates the Creation Museum 45 miles away in Petersburg, Kentucky; the theme park promotes pseudoscientific young Earth creationist beliefs about the age of the universe, age of the Earth, co-existence of man and non-avian dinosaurs. After feasibility studies projected that the park would be a boon to the state's tourism industry, the Ark Encounter received tax incentives from the city and state to induce its construction; this drew criticism from groups concerned with the separation of state. A dispute over AiG's hiring practices was adjudicated in U. S. federal court, which found in 2016 that the organization could require Ark Encounter employees to sign a statement of faith as a condition of their employment, prompting criticism of the park's discriminatory hiring practices.

The ark contains each standing about 18 feet high, arranged into three decks. Visitors enter on the lowest deck and move between decks on ramps constructed through the center of the ark. Bays on the first deck contain; the models are meant to represent "kinds" of animals, which AiG says gave rise to modern animals after the flood. Prior to the Ark's opening, media outlets reported it would feature models of dinosaurs and "Biblical unicorns"; the second deck contains more animal models, along with dioramas of Noah's workshop and a blacksmith. Bays on the third deck contain displays presenting what AiG believes might have happened inside and outside the ark during the flood. Displays in three of the bays include artifacts from the Green Collection and promote the Museum of the Bible, a Washington, D. C. attraction constructed by the Green family. rated the displays depicting the sinful state of the world before the flood, including a priest sacrificing an infant to an unnamed snake god and people fighting a giant and a dinosaur in a gladiatorial arena, as among the most memorable exhibits in the attraction.

The ark is held 15 feet off the ground by a series of concrete towers. The starboard side of the hull merges into three 80-foot masonry towers containing stairwells and restrooms. On December 1, 2010, the young Earth creationism group Answers in Genesis and the for-profit corporation Ark Encounter, LLC announced that they would partner to build a theme park called Ark Encounter that, as they claimed, would "lend credence to the biblical account of a catastrophic flood and to dispel doubts that Noah could have fit two of every kind of animal onto a 500-foot-long ark"; the partners projected that the completed park would cost $150 million, which they intended to raise privately. Under a program enacted by the Kentucky General Assembly in 2010, Ark Encounter investors applied for economic development incentives that would allow them to recoup 25 percent of the project's construction costs by keeping a portion of the park's sales taxes during its first ten years of operation. Receipt of the incentives would be contingent upon Ark Encounter meeting established performance goals upon opening.

A press release from Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear's office cited a feasibility study commissioned by Ark Encounter, LLC and conducted by consumer research corporation America's Research Group Limited, Inc. The company had conducted the feasibility study for AiG's Ark Encounter and an attitudinal survey included in Ken Ham's book Already Gone. Britt Beemer was credited as a co-author of the book; this projected the park could employ 900 people, attract as many as 1.6 million visitors in its first year of operation, generate a $214 million economic impact for the region. The group selected an 800-acre parcel near Interstate 75 in Grant County, near the city of Williamstown and about 45 miles from AiG's Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky; the city of Williamstown designated a 1.25-mile radius around the Ark Encounter site as a tax increment financing district, meaning 75 percent of sales and property taxes collected in the district would return to Ark Encounter for a period of 30 years.

Employees working in the district would pay a 2 percent employment tax over the same time frame that would go to the Ark Encounter. The Grant County Industrial Development Authority paid Ark Encounter, LLC $195,000 to compensate the corporation for the fact that word of their interest in building the attraction in Grant County had leaked early, causing land prices to double in the area. Further, the Grant County Fiscal Court discounted the sale price of 100 acres of the site to influence the final selection. Citing the proffered incentives, Ark Encounter, LLC made the Grant County site their final selection and scheduled groundbreaking for August 2011. Plans for additional phases of the park include a model of the Tower of Babel, along with replicas of an ancient walled city and a first-century Middle Eastern village. Ark Encounter, LLC finalized the purchase of the entire Ark Encounter site in February 2012. At that time, AiG announced the decision to construct the park in phases, saying it had raised only $5 million of the $24 million needed to begin construction.

The first phase included a full-scale model of a petting zoo. Plan

Equitable remedy

Equitable remedies are judicial remedies developed by courts of equity from about the time of Henry VIII to provide more flexible responses to changing social conditions than was possible in precedent-based common law. Equitable remedies were granted by the Court of Chancery in England, remain available today in most common law jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions and equitable remedies have been merged and a single court can issue either, or both, remedies. Despite widespread judicial merger, the distinction between equitable and legal remedies remains relevant in a number of significant instances. Notably, the United States Constitution's Seventh Amendment preserves the right to a jury trial in civil cases over $20 to cases "at common law"; the distinction between types of relief granted by the courts is due to the courts of equity, such as the Court of Chancery in England, still available today in common law jurisdictions. Equity is said to operate on the conscience of the defendant, so an equitable remedy is always directed at a particular person, that person's knowledge, state of mind and motives may be relevant to whether a remedy should be granted or not.

Equitable remedies are distinguished from "legal" remedies by the discretion of the court to grant them. In common law jurisdictions, there are a variety of equitable remedies, but the principal remedies are: injunction specific performance account of profits rescission rectification equitable estoppel certain proprietary remedies, such as constructive trusts subrogation in specific circumstances, an equitable lien. Equitable compensation appointment or removal of fiduciary interpleaderThe two main equitable remedies are injunctions and specific performance, in casual legal parlance references to equitable remedies are expressed as referring to those two remedies alone. Injunctions may be prohibitory. Specific performance requires a party to perform a contract, for example by transferring a piece of land to the claimant; the award of specific performance requires that the two following criteria must be satisfied: Common law damages must be an inadequate remedy. For instance, when damages for a breach of contract found in favour of a third party are an inadequate remedy.

No bars to equitable relief prevent specific performance. A bar to relief arises for example, when the court's continuous supervision of the defendant is not feasible. An account of profits is ordered where payment of damages would still leave the wrongdoer unjustly enriched at the expense of the wronged party. However, orders for an account are not available as of right, only arise in certain circumstances. Rescission and rectification are remedies in relation to contracts. Constructive trusts and tracing remedies are used where the claimant asserts that property has been wrongly appropriated from them, either the property has increased in value, thus they should have an interest in the increase in value which occurred at their expense, or the property has been transferred by the wrongdoer to an innocent third party, the original owner should be able to claim a right to the property as against the innocent third party. Equitable liens only arise in specific factual circumstances, such as unpaid vendor's lien.

Equitable principles can limit the granting of equitable remedies. This includes "he who comes to equity must come with clean hands", laches, "equity will not assist a volunteer" and that equitable remedies will not be granted where damages would be an adequate remedy; the most important limitation relating to equitable remedies is that an equitable remedy will not lie against a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. Damages can be awarded in "equity" as opposed to "at law", in some legal systems, by historical accident, interest on damages can be awarded on a compound basis only on equitable damages, but not on damages awarded at law. However, most jurisdictions either have ended this anachronism, or evinced an intention to do so, by modernising legislation. Two versions of the legislation are in force in Australian jurisdiction with one version placing emphasis on "commission of a wrongful act" and the other omits the reference to wrongdoing; the classification of a remedy as equitable has various consequences.

For example, equitable remedies may be enforced by contempt, equitable remedies are subject to equitable defenses. Legal remedy English trust law