I am an amateur historian who is considering writing a book about the history of Treason in the United States. I have a dilemma with how to format citations.

The book, by nature of being history of law, would have to cite both historical and legal sources.

  1. Should I cite everything using Chicago Style, everything one of the law citation formats, or use the Chicago style for the history sections and the law citations for the legal section?

  2. Does my choice in citation format affect my book's ability to be cited in academic journals?

  • 1
    As a general note, I strongly recommend you use some form of citation manager (probably any of them at all) so that converting from one style to another would not be a strictly manual (nightmare) process, as ultimately the final style will be dictated by the publisher. So good that you try to pick the right style in the first place, but you'll want to be flexible in case you need to change it later.
    – BrianH
    Nov 27, 2018 at 19:22

1 Answer 1


If you are hoping to submit the book to certain publishers you could check what guidelines they have for authors. For example, here is a link to the Oxford University Press

I would not recommend to use the Chicago style for the history sections and the law citations for the legal section. Using a consistent citation style across your manuscript would normally be expected, and again some publishers may expect you to use a specific style.

If you are using a citation style used by your publisher I don't see why it should impact on if your work would be cited or not. The content of your work and if other academics use it should be what would gets it cited.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .