The Final Bibliography of the thesis

Had we not already discussed this topic at length at least twice, this would be a very long and detailed section. In section 3.2.3 we discussed how to record bibliographical infor­mation for books and articles, and in sections 5.4.2 and 5.4.3 we discussed both how to refer­ence a work in the text and in a note, and how to format references so they work with the final bibliography. If you return to these three sections, you will find everything you need to write a good final bibliography.

Additionally, let us say first of all that a thesis must have a final bibliography, notwith­standing the detail and precision of the refer­ences in the notes. You cannot force your reader to shuffle through pages of text to find needed information. For some theses, the final bibliography is a useful if not essential addi­tion. For others, the final bibliography may constitute the most interesting part: studies on the critical literature of a given topic; a thesis on all the published and unpublished works of a given author; or a thesis centered on bibliographical research, such as “Studies on Fascism from 1945 to 1950,” where obviously the final bibliography is not an aid but the primary goal.

Finally, we just need to add a few instruc­tions on how to structure a bibliography. Let us imagine, for example, a thesis on Bertrand Russell. We will divide the bibliography into “Works by Bertrand Russell” and “Works on Bertrand Russell.” (We could also have a more general section called “Works on the History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century.”) Russell’s works will appear in chronological order while the critical literature on Russell will appear in alphabetical order, unless the topic of the thesis is “Studies on Bertrand Russell from 1950 to 1960 in England,” in which case the critical literature should also appear in chronological order. In a thesis about Watergate, we could divide the bibliography as follows: excerpts from the Nixon White House tapes, court transcripts and other court docu­ments, official statements, media coverage, and critical literature. (We might also include a section of relevant works on contemporary American politics.) As you can see, the format will change according to the thesis type, and the goal is to organize your bibliography so that it allows readers to identify and distin­guish between primary and secondary sources, rigorous critical studies and less reliable secondary sources, etc.

In essence, and based on what we have said in the previous chapters, the aims of a bibliogra­phy are: (a) to clearly identify a source; (b) to enable the reader to find the source if needed; (c) to demonstrate the author’s famil­iarity with the chosen discipline. Demonstrating familiarity with the discipline entails demon­strating both knowledge of all the literature on your topic and a command of the discipline’s bibliographical conventions. Regarding the latter, it may be that the standard conventions described in this book are not the best for your situation, and for this reason you should model your work on the critical literature in your specific field. Regarding the former, you will need to decide whether to include only the works you have consulted or all those that exist on a particular topic. The most obvious answer is that the bibliography of a thesis must list only the works you have consulted, and that any other solution would be dishonest. But here too, it depends on the type of thesis you are writing. For example, the specific aim of your research project may include compiling all the written texts on a specific topic, even though it may be humanly impossible to read them all before you graduate. In this case you should clearly state that you did not consult all the works in the bibliography, and should indicate those you did read, perhaps with an asterisk. But such a project is valid only where there are no exist­ing complete bibliographies, so that your work consists precisely of compiling references that were once scattered. If by chance there is already a complete bibliography, it is better to refer the reader to it, and to include in your bibliography only the works you have actually consulted.

Often the reliability of a bibliography is evident from its title. Readers will have very different expectations from titles such as “Bibliographical References,” “Works Cited,” and “General Bibliography on Topic X.” You cannot use the title “Bibliography on the Second World War” for a meager bibliography of thirty titles in English. Instead, simply call it “Works Cited” and hope for the best.

And no matter how meager your bibliography is, at least make an effort to put it in the correct alphabetical order. There are some rules: begin with the last name, and obviously titles of nobility like “de” and “von” do not belong to the last name, while capitalized prepositions do. So include “D’Annunzio” under D, but “Ferdinand de Saussure” under S, as “Saussure, Ferdinand de.” Write “De Amicis, Edmondo,” “Du Bellay, Joachim,” “La Fontaine, Jean de”; but write “Beethoven, Ludwig van.” Here too, keep an eye on the criti­cal literature and follow its conventions. For example, for ancient authors (and until the fourteenth century), alphabetize by the first name. Do not alphabetize by what might seem to be the last name but is actually a patronymic or an indication of place of birth.

In conclusion, below is a standard division for the final bibliography of a generic thesis:

Primary sources

Bibliographical indexes

Secondary sources on the topic or the author (perhaps divided into sections for books and articles)

Additional material (interviews, documents, statements).

Source: Eco Umberto, Farina Caterina Mongiat, Farina Geoff (2015), How to write a thesis, The MIT Press.