A VEGETATION RECONSTRUCTION OF UNION COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DURING THE EARLY HISTORICAL PERIOD (1755-1855)

This thesis assesses relationships between vegetation and topography and the impact of human tree-cutting on the vegetation of Union County during the early historical era (1755-1855). I use early warrant maps and forestry maps from the Pennsylvania historical archives and a warrantee map from the Union County courthouse depicting the distribution of witness trees and non-tree surveyed markers (posts and stones) in early European settlement land surveys to reconstruct the vegetation and compare vegetation by broad scale (mountains and valleys) and local scale (topographic classes with mountains and valleys) topography. I calculated marker density based on 2 km x 2 km grid cells to assess tree-cutting impacts. Valleys were mostly forests dominated by white oak (Quercus alba) with abundant hickory (Carya spp.), pine (Pinus spp.), and black oak (Quercus velutina), while pine dominated what were mostly pine-oak forests in the mountains. Within the valleys, pine was strongly associated with hilltops, eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) was abundant on north slopes, hickory was associated with south slopes, and riparian zones had high frequencies of ash (Fraxinus spp.) and hickory. In the mountains, white oak was infrequent on south slopes, chestnut (Castanea dentata) was more abundant on south slopes and ridgetops than north slopes and mountain coves, and white oak and maple (Acer spp.) were common in riparian zones. Marker density analysis suggests that trees were still common over most of the landscape by 1855. The findings suggest there were large differences in vegetation between valleys and mountains due in part to differences in elevation, and vegetation differed more by topographic classes in the valleys than in the mountains. Possible areas of tree-cutting were evenly distributed by topographic classes, suggesting Europeans settlers were clearing land and harvesting timber in most areas of Union County.

Aporias of Trauma in Joyce's Ulysses and Faulkner's Light in August

In this thesis, I explore the relationships between trauma, memory, and narrative, particularly the ways in which trauma simultaneously disrupts and engenders narrative structures. I consider various trauma theories by authors such as Cathy Caruth, Judith Herman, Ruth Leys, and Dominick LaCapra. I also consider how psychoanalytic theory and criticism, specifically the writings of Sigmund Freud, inform the study of traumatic experience from both literary and personal perspectives. Furthermore, I consider theories regarding the relationship between trauma and narrative by authors such as Peter Brooks and John Pilkington. James Joyce¿s Ulysses and William Faulkner¿s Light in August serve, for my purposes, as trauma-texts and reflect the ways in which trauma might complicate the simultaneous destruction and creation of narrative strategies. Reading Ulysses and Light in August as trauma-texts that are both in mourning and melancholic gives us complementary, and contradictory, reasons for why we enjoy them. Mourning constructs a relationship between victim and witness, in which we can hear the voice of trauma and engage it in discourse. Conversely, melancholia creates a relationship between performer and spectator, in which we experience, and are fascinated by, the spectacle of another¿s trauma. Laughter, perversity, sorrow, and respite engage the reader in both texts, and raise questions about how one `remembers-to-forget¿ traumatic experiences. The narratives of each text¿s characters offer unique performances of mourning and melancholia. Thus, while this thesis engenders more questions than answers, I hope to argue that Ulysses and Light in August are significant literary works because each engages the reader in traumatic discourse, entertains the reader with the traumatic spectacle, and enlightens the reader on the complex relationship between trauma and narrative.