Very interesting! I think it's wonderful how you used this book to then point to larger questions about both fictional and historical storytelling. Another thought that I had (and I think this is quite common... so that might be why you didn't mention it), is to structure a history around a certain theme or even just hypothesis. It's common to do that for academic papers, and I think it could still work in a situation like this. You make a claim about a tendency of resistance groups in broader global or European history in a certain period, and then you you examine at a micro level how each group either fits or doesn't fit that mold -- and then when you're explaining this, you get an opportunity to say other things. Obviously, it's less of a story based approach... but in a way, your opening claim is the protagonist... or it could end up being a Macguffin.
Very interesting! I think it's wonderful how you used this book to then point to larger questions about both fictional and historical storytelling. Another thought that I had (and I think this is quite common... so that might be why you didn't mention it), is to structure a history around a certain theme or even just hypothesis. It's common to do that for academic papers, and I think it could still work in a situation like this. You make a claim about a tendency of resistance groups in broader global or European history in a certain period, and then you you examine at a micro level how each group either fits or doesn't fit that mold -- and then when you're explaining this, you get an opportunity to say other things. Obviously, it's less of a story based approach... but in a way, your opening claim is the protagonist... or it could end up being a Macguffin.